Dr. Mrs. Vaishali W/O. Rajkumar ... vs Lok Gyan Prasarak Sanstha ...

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 5824 Bom
Judgement Date : 3 October, 2016

Bombay High Court
Dr. Mrs. Vaishali W/O. Rajkumar ... vs Lok Gyan Prasarak Sanstha ... on 3 October, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
     0310WP4356.15-Judgment                                                              1/4


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                    
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                            
                         WRIT PETITION NO.  4356   OF   2015


     PETITIONERS :-                1. Dr. Mrs. Vaishali W/o Rajkumar Das, Aged




                                                           
                                      about 40 years, Occu.: Nil, R/o Plot No.287,
                                      Nirupama   Loksewa   Nagar,   Bhamti,   Opp.
                                      Mokhare College, Nagpur.  
                                   2. Suchita   W/o   Indrajeet   Amgaonkar,   Aged




                                              
                                      about   39   years,   Occu.:   Nil,   R/o   75,
                                      Prathamesh   Apartments,   S.E.Railway
                              ig      Colony, Pratap Nagar, Nagpur-22. 
                                   3. Smt.   Manjusha   Deoraoji   Ambatkar,   Aged
                                      about 33 years, Occu.: Nil, R/o Plot No.92,
                            
                                      Gajanan Dham, Near Sahakar Nagar, Khamla
                                      Road, Nagpur.  

                                         ...VERSUS... 
      

     RESPONDENTS :-                1. Lok   Gyan   Prasarak   Sanstha,   Chandrapur,
                                      Through its President. 
   



                                   2. Lok   Gyan   Prasarak   Sanstha,   Chandrapur,
                                      Through its Secretary.
                                      Respondent   Nos.1   &   2   R/o   C/o   Smt.
                                      Vandana   Digambar   Haste,   Plot   No.17,





                                      Besides   Bank   of   Maharashtra,   South
                                      Ambazari Road, Laxmi Nagar, Nagpur. 
                                   3. The   Dean   /   Principal,   C/o   Shri   S.   K.
                                      Banerjee Niharika College of Physiotherapy,
                                      3rd  /   4th  Floor,   Madhu-Madhav   Towers,





                                      Laxmi   Bhavan   Square,   West   High   Court
                                      Road, Nagpur. 
                                   4.   The   Registrar,   Maharashtra   University   of
                                        Health   Sciences,   Nashik,   Dindori   Road,
                                        Mhasrul, Nashik-422 004. 
                                   5. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,
                                      132-A, Ridge Road, Raghuji Nagar, Tukdoji
                                      Putala, Nagpur.   




    ::: Uploaded on - 05/10/2016                            ::: Downloaded on - 06/10/2016 00:44:03 :::
      0310WP4356.15-Judgment                                                                         2/4


     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




                                                                                              
                      Mr.V. P. Marpakwar, counsel for the petitioners.
               Mr.B.G.Kulkarni, counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.




                                                                    
               Mr. U.M.Aurangabadkar, counsel for the respondent No.3.
               Mr. Abhijeet Deshpande, counsel fro the respondent No.4
                   Mr. S.D.Sirpurkar, counsel for the respondent No.5. 
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




                                                                   
                                            CORAM : SMT. VASANTI    A    NAIK & 
                                                        KUM. INDIRA JAIN,   JJ.

DATED : 03.10.2016 O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A. Naik, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, at the stage of admission.

The only prayer made by the petitioners in this writ petition is for a direction against the respondents to implement the order of the Grievance Committee.

Shri Aurangabadkar, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, states that the liability of the respondent No.3 was only to the extent of 25% and the amount towards the liability is paid by the respondent No.3 to the petitioners.

The learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute this statement.

::: Uploaded on - 05/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 06/10/2016 00:44:03 :::

0310WP4356.15-Judgment 3/4 Shri Kulkarni, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1, states that the respondent No.1 does not dispute the liability of paying the amount to the extent of 75%, as directed by the Grievance Committee. It is stated that some time may be granted to the respondent No.1 to pay the amount to the petitioners. It is stated that the respondent No.1 is ready to clear the dues, that are payable to the petitioners, by 31/12/2016.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent No.3 as also the respondent No.1, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner should stand redressed.

Hence, by accepting the statement made on behalf of the respondent No.1 and that would be binding on the respondent No.1, we allow the writ petition. The respondent No.1 is directed to pay the amount towards 75% of the dues, that are liable to be paid by the respondent No.1 to the petitioners in three equal installments, payable in the month of October, November and December, 2016. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.

                                JUDGE                                           JUDGE 

     KHUNTE




    ::: Uploaded on - 05/10/2016                                ::: Downloaded on - 06/10/2016 00:44:03 :::
      0310WP4356.15-Judgment                                                             4/4




                                                                                   
                                   C E R T I F I C A T E




                                                           

I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Judgment.

Uploaded by : G.S.Khunte, Uploaded on : 05/10/2016 P.A.to Hon'ble Judge ::: Uploaded on - 05/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 06/10/2016 00:44:03 :::