Bombay High Court
Bhagubai Walmik Khandagale vs Social Forestry Department on 26 November, 2013
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
WP/2107/2012
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2107 OF 2012
Bhagubai Walmik Khandagale
Age 62 years, Occ. Nil,
R/o Ustal Dumala, Tq. Newasa
District Ahmednagar. ..Petitioner
Versus
Social Forestry Department
Sudke Mala, Ahmednagar,
Through Deputy Director. ..Respondent
ig WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 2537 OF 2012
Hausabai Natha Randive
Age 40 years, Occ. Nil,
R/o Ustal Dumala, Tq. Newasa
District Ahmednagar. ..Petitioner
Versus
Social Forestry Department
Sudke Mala, Ahmednagar,
Through Deputy Director. ..Respondent
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Shri P.V.Barde
AGP for Respondents: Shri K. M. Suryawanshi
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ.
Dated : November 26, 2013
ORAL JUDGMENT:-
1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties in both the
petitions.
WP/2107/2012
2. Rule. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and the
petitions are taken up for final disposal.
3. Shri Barde, learned Advocate for petitioners in both the petitions,
while opening his submissions has stated that he would prefer to curtail
the same to a very short point. He states that the date of the impugned
Awards is 17.7.2010 passed in Reference cases IDA Nos. 13/2006 and
17/2006 respectively. The petitioners stood superannuated prior to the
date of the awards.
ig The References have been allowed partly to the
extent of the petitioners having been granted reinstatement with notional
continuity of services from the date of their termination but without back
wages.
4. Shri Barde, learned Advocate further contends that the relief
awarded in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, wherein the
petitioners stood retired prior to it's deliverance has virtually rendered
the awards a paper arrangement and the petitioners have not gained
benefit of any nature from the said awards. He, therefore, prays that if
compensation was to be quantified in lieu of reinstatement and notional
continuity of service, the petitioners who are tilting towards old age,
would stand benefited. He, therefore, prays that References be
remanded back to I-Labour Court, Ahmednagar for arriving at such
quantification.
5. Shri Suryawanshi, learned AGP on the one hand has strongly
WP/2107/2012
supported the awards to the extent of denial of backwages and on the
other hand, clarifies that the respondent has not challenged the said
awards to the extent of order of reinstatement with notional continuity of
service from the date of termination. In fairness, he, therefore, states
that if the law to arrive at a compensation in lieu of reinstatement is in
place, the matter could very well be remanded to the I - Labour Court,
Ahmednagar only for this limited purpose.
6.
In the case of O.P.Bhandari Vs. ITDC [(1986) 4 SCC 337] and
J.W.Mane Vs. Wockhardt [2010 LLR 955] the law and principles to be
followed for arriving at a quantum of compensation in lieu of
reinstatement have already been laid down. The Labour Court, which is
the competent authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in the
Reference proceeding is therefore, vested with jurisdiction to arrive at
such a quantification I, therefore, find no hesitation in accepting the joint
plea of the respective parties.
7. Shri Barde, learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that oral
and documentary evidence only to the extent of proving the last drawn
wages payable to the petitioners will have to be placed before the I-
Labour Court, Ahmednagar, so as to enable it to arrive at the amount of
compensation. He, therefore, seeks liberty to adduce oral and
documentary evidence to that extent.
WP/2107/2012
8. In the result, both the petitions are partly allowed and disposed of.
9. The impugned awards dated 17.7.2010 are quashed and set aside
by consent and Reference IDA No.13 of 2006 and Reference IDA No.17 of
2006 are remitted to the I-Labour Court, Ahmednagar only to the extent
of both the parties making an effort to assist the Court in arriving at the
amount of compensation in lieu of reinstatement with notional continuity
of service from their dates of termination till their dates of
superannuation. However, it is is clarified that the remand of this matter
will not amount to the contentions of the petitioners having been
accepted by this Court. The I-Labour Court, Ahmednagar shall decide only
this issue, on its own merits, without being influenced by the observations
made in this order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a
period of six months from today. Both the parties are at liberty to lead
oral and documentary evidence limited to that extent. The parties shall
cooperate in assisting the Court for an expeditious disposal of the
references, within the time frame.
10. Rule is accordingly made partly absolute in both the petitions with
no order as to costs.
(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
...
akl
