As per case facts, Hindustan Lever Limited (then Tata Oil Mills Co. Limited) served chargesheets on employees for alleged misconduct. The employees filed complaints before the Labour Court, alleging unfair ... labour practices and seeking interim relief against termination. The Labour Court dismissed these complaints as premature, stating no actual discharge or dismissal orders were passed. This view was upheld by a Single Judge of the High Court. However, the appellate Division Bench of the High Court reversed this decision, holding that complaints filed before actual termination orders were maintainable. The employer then appealed to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the Labour Court, under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, has jurisdiction to entertain complaints regarding contemplated discharge or dismissal by way of unfair labour practice, even before actual termination orders are issued. Finally, the Supreme Court upheld the Division Bench's decision, affirming that Labour Courts have jurisdiction to entertain complaints of apprehended unfair labour practices related to discharge or dismissal, even if final orders have not yet been passed. The Court emphasized the Act's purpose of preventing unfair labour practices and interpreted the term "to discharge or dismiss" to include actions initiated towards such an end, not just the completed act. It held that allowing complaints only after final orders would render the preventive aspect of the Act otiose, akin to bolting the stable door after the horse has fled. The Court stressed a liberal, purposive interpretation for social welfare legislation.