Justice Nitin Jamdar refused to grant the relief while hearing a petition filed by the union challenging the order of the industrial court.
"I do not find that a prima facie case has been made out for grant of interim relief. Neither, the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner (union). The prayer for interim relief is accordingly rejected," observed Justice Jamdar.
Neeta Karnik, counsel for the union, argued that the duty schedule which was to be implemented from April 1, should not be given effect to.
Chiding the union, the judge observed in its 24 page order: "It appears that the only interest of the Union is to somehow see that the experiment does not proceed, even though agreeing for the same."
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
