The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Industrial Court's interference in the matter without finding any error of jurisdiction in the Labour Court's order constituted an excess of jurisdiction under Section 67 of the M. P. I. R. Act.

( 1 ) PETITIONERS by Shri K. N. Gupta, senior advocate with Shri Girdhari Singh Chouhan, advocate. Respondents/employee by Shri B. P. Singh and Shri Alok Sharma, advocate. As common questions and orders identical in nature passed by the Industrial Court are challenged in both these petitions being W. P. Nos. 136/2005 and 137/2005, they are being disposed of by this common order. On the ground that services of respondent/employees are required at Indore and Rewa in view of the requisition Annexure-P/6 dated October 11, 2004 received in the matter, respondents/ employees were transferred to Rewa and indore respectively by orders of transfer annexure-P/2 dated October 26, 2004. Challenging the aforesaid transfer orders to be illegal on the grounds of mala fide, contrary to their service condition and being by expressing certain personal difficulties in the matter pertaining the education of their children being adversely affected by transferring them in mids of the academic session both the employees filed applications under Section 31 read with sections 61 and 62 of the M. P. I. R. Act before the Labour Court No. I, Gwalior. Along with the application challenging the order of transfer application under Section 107, M. P. Industrial relations Act, 1960 was filed seeking stay of the order of transfer. Notices were issued, replies were filed by the respondents-employee and on the basis of the material and documents that came on record Labour Court vide order annexure-P/7 dated December 9, 2004 passed a common order in both the cases holding that no prima facie case is made out. It was held by the learned Court that transfer of the employees are in accordance with the terms and conditions of their appointment, mala fide pleaded, has not been established and finding no ground available after assessment of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss in favour of the employees rejected their prayer for stay. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, respondents/employees preferred Miscellaneous Application purported to be under Section 67 of the M. P. Industrial relations Act before the Industrial Court, gwalior vide Annexure-P/8. The aforesaid applications were allowed by the impugned order Annexure-P/9 dated January 4, 2005 and holding that the transfer in the mids of the session is contrary to the observations of the supreme Court in the case of Director of School education, Madras and others v. O. Karuppa thevan and another, 1997 MPLSR 657. Industrial Court interfered in the matter and directed for stay of the order of transfer. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of Industrial court, this petition has been filed by the petitioners. Shri K. N. Gupta, learned senior counsel inviting my attention to terms and conditions of appointment of the employees as contained in their order of appointment annexure-P/1 argued that contract of appointment stipulates a condition of transfer from one Branch to another, from one department to another and as transfer in the present case was necessitated because of the requirement of trained mechanics in Indore and rewa and keeping in view the requisition received vide Annexure-P/6, the respondents-employees were transferred in the interest of administration. It is stated that wrongly applying the judgment in the case of Director of School Education (supra) Industrial Court committed material irregularity in interfering in the matter. Shri K. N. Gupta, learned senior counsel argued that provisions of M. P. I. R. Act are not applicable to the petitioner/establishment, no mala fide was proved and ignoring the well settled principle of law with regard to judicial review in a matter of transfer placing reliance on the following judgments, Shri Gupta, learned senior counsel argued that interference made by the Industrial court was not proper. The judgment relied upon by learned senior counsel are: kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Damodar prasad Pandey and others, 2004 L