1 wp1446.09.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1446 OF 2009
Parmatma Ek Sevak Nagarik
Sahakari Bank, through its Chief
Executive Officer Shri Namdeo
Mahadeo Barapatre, aged about
Major, Occ. Service, Office at
Ganes Peth, Nagpur PETITIONER
ig ...VERSUS...
Shri Bandu Shriram Thavkar,
aged about Major, Occ. Head Cashier,
Office at Parmatma Ek Sevak Nagarik
Sahakari Bank, Golibar Chowk Branch,
Itwari, Nagpur. ...... RESPONDENT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None for the parties
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J.
th DATE : 11 SEPTEMBER, 2015 .
ORAL JUDGMENT None for the parties.
2] The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and order dated 27.08.2008, passed by the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULPN) No. 25 of 2004, filed under Section 28 read with Item 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2015 23:56:05 ::: 2 wp1446.09.odt Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short MRTU and PULP Act) which has been allowed and the petitioner bank is directed to consider the case of the complainant for promotion to the post of Assistant Branch Manager of the Bank with effect from 06.08.2001 with all consequential benefits within a period of 4 months from the date of the order. The employer is, therefore, before this Court in this writ petition.
3] On 13.07.2009, the matter was admitted with the following order.
"Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Rule Since the petitioner has made out a prima facie case, the impugned order dated 27.08.2008 is stayed only in regard to the direction to the petitioner to pay the consequential benefits to the respondent with effect from 06.08.2001.
The learned counsel Shri Bhoot waives notice of hearing on behalf of the respondent"
By way of interim order, this Court has protected the relief granted to the complainant regarding consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Assistant Branch Manager of the Bank. However, the order granting consequential benefits has beens stayed.
::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2015 23:56:05 ::: 3 wp1446.09.odt
4] The Industrial Court has recorded the finding that
the complainant was senior to two other persons namely, Shri Ganesh Kamble and Shri Sheetal Wagh , who were at Serial No. 8 and 16 respectively in the seniority list of Senior Clerk prepared on 01.01.2001. The name of the complainant appears at Serial No. 6 in the seniority list. The complainant was promoted to the post of Chief Cashier on 16.03.2001, which probably is the post below the post of Assistant Branch Manager in hierarchy. The two other persons namely Shri Ganesh Kamble and Shri Sheetal Wagh who were below in the seniority list of Senior Clerk were promoted in supersession to the claim of the complainant directly to the post of Assistant Branch Manager. The Industrial Court found voilation of Item 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU and PULP Act.
5] The Industrial Court could not have recorded the aforesaid finding in the absence of the concerned persons being joined as party respondent in the original complaint.
The complainant ought to have joined Shri Ganesh Kamble and Shri Sheetal Wagh as respondents in the complaint and the Industrial Court ought to have provided such opportunity ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2015 23:56:05 ::: 4 wp1446.09.odt to the complainant. The order passed by the Industrial Court, therefore, need to be set aside on this short ground with a direction to decide the matter afresh after permitting the complainant to join the said persons as party respondents in the main complaint.
6] In the result, writ petition is party allowed. The judgment and order dated 27.08.2008 passed by the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULPN) No. 25 of 2004 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Industrial Court to decide it afresh after giving the complainant an opportunity to join the aforestated two persons as party respondents in the main complaint. Upon joining such persons as respondents, notices shall be issued by the Industrial Court and thereafter the matter shall be decided in accordance with law. Pending the decision of the complaint, the position prevailing as on this date shall continue to operate.
Rule is made absolute in these terms. No order as to cost.
JUDGE Rvjalit ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 16/09/2015 23:56:05 :::