JUDGMENT

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J. - The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 12/04/2016 delivered by the Industrial Court, Jalgaon, by which, complaint (ULP) No. 107/2015 filed by the petitionerestablishment, has been held to be untenable under the MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 for the reason that the appropriate government for a controlled industry ( cement ) is not the State Government.

2. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has strenuously criticized the impugned order and has drawn my attention to the nine grounds formulated by him in the memo of the petition. It is submitted that different unfair Labour Practices (ULP) have been defined in the Schedule II, III and IV of the 1971 Act. Schedule II pertains to unfair labour practices committed by the employers. Schedule III pertains to the unfair labour practices committed by the Trade Unions and Schedule IV pertains to general Unfair Labour Practices committed by the employers. Item 1 of Schedule IV falls under the jurisdiction of the Labour Court and all other items under Schedule II, III and Items 2 to 10 under Schedule IV are within the jurisdiction of the Industrial Court.

3. Grievance is that when the employer has complaine