The Dy. Conservator Of Forest Wild ... vs Sau.Chandrarekha W/O ...

Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 3249 Bom
Judgement Date : 15 June, 2017

Bombay High Court
The Dy. Conservator Of Forest Wild ... vs Sau.Chandrarekha W/O ... on 15 June, 2017
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
                                    1                            jlpa274of07.odt




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR


                LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.274 OF 2007

                                        IN

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 3507 OF 2007


      1       The Deputy conservator of Forest, 
              Wild Life, Allapalli at present 
              Mul Road, Chandrapur

      2       The Chief conservator of Forest, 
              Wild Life Forest Division, 
              4rth Floor, Seminari Hills, 
              Ambedkar bhavan, 
              Near T.V. Tower, Nagpur 
              (At present near Government 
              Printing Press, Civil Lines, Nagpur     ... APPELLANTS

              // VERSUS //

              Sau. Chandrarekha w/o. Chandrabhan 
              Raut,
              R/o. Alapalli, 
              At present R/o.Indira Nagar, 
              Ambedkar Chowk, 
              MulRoad, Chandrapur.              ..RESPONDENT




::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2017                    ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:03:44 :::
                                      2                                 jlpa274of07.odt

      -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
               Mr.P.S.Tembhare, AGP for Appellants
              Mr.Ghate, Advocate for the Respondent
       -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

                             CORAM     :     B.P.DHARMADHIKARI,  J.

R.B.DEO, J.

                                     DATE         :  15.06.2017. 


      ORAL JUDGMENT     (Per B.P.Dharmadhikari, J)  :


      1       We   have   heard   respective   counsel   yesterday.     The

termination of respondent workman was found bad by Labour Court, Chandrapur in Reference I.D. 1 of 2002 dated 21.09.2006. She was given relief of reinstatement with continuity and back wages from the date of termination till reinstatement. Award delivered by Labour Court shows that Labour Court has accepted date 5.9.1992 as date of entry into service and date 25.1.2001 as date of permanency. This Award was questioned by appellant in Writ Petition No. 3007 of 2007 before learned Single Judge of this Court. Vide Judgment dated 20.8.2007, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. Learned AGP Shri Tembhare invited our attention to subsequent events. ::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:03:44 :::

3 jlpa274of07.odt He points out that as learned Single Judge did not stay the judgment and in L.P.A. also there was no interim order to reinstatement, the respondent was provided work. She has been given benefit of Government Resolution dated 16.10.2016 and accordingly has been appointed on a super numeracy post with effect from 1.6.2012. He submits that in view of constitution Bench judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Umadevi & Ors. reported AIR 2006 SC 1806, as a one time measure the policy decision was taken by State Government. According to him, in the situation, the L.P.A. itself has become infractious.

2 Advocate Shri Ghate submits that as date of initial entry into service and date of termination are accepted and thereafter there is a reinstatement with continuity and full wages, date of entry i.e. 5.12.1992 can not be overlooked and hence mention of date 1.6.2012 in order of appointment dated 19.12.2012, is irrelevant. He submits that denial of past service to respondent in this situation may itself constitute an unfair labour practice. ::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:03:44 :::

                                    4                                  jlpa274of07.odt

      3       Learned AGP in reply submits that granting relief of

reinstatement to respondent does not automatically result in regularization or grant of permanency. The decision reached subsequently is in terms of policy decision mentioned Supra and hence the other contentions are now not material.

4 The respondent is already provided work and is working. The respondent has also given up back wages and as such, the Award to the extent of grant of back wages can not be implemented and executed against employer. Question about Date of service put in by petitioner between 5.12.1992 to 1.6.2012 is not relevant in present matter. If respondent has for the purposes of securing benefit of regularization given some undertaking, its impact may also require consideration independently.

5 Therefore, leaving these issues open, we accept submission of learned AGP that because of order of appointment dated 29.12.2012, present challenge is rendered infractious. Accordingly L.P.A. is disposed of. ::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:03:44 :::

5 jlpa274of07.odt Needless to mention that the other contentions raised by Advocate Shri Ghate are kept open. No costs.

                                              JUDGE              JUDGE

belkhede, PA




               ::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2017                ::: Downloaded on - 23/06/2017 00:03:44 :::