Bombay High Court
City Of Nagpur Municipal Corp. ... vs Madhukar Narayan Chore & 33 Ors on 30 March, 2016
Bench: S.B. Shukre
J-wp239.08.odt 1/9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION No.239 OF 2008
City of Nagpur Municipal Corporation,
through its Municipal Commissioner,
Civil lines, Nagpur 440 001. : PETITIONER
...VERSUS...
1. Madhukar Narayan Chore,
(Revision BIR No.14/07).
2. Deepak Krushnarao Bhavsar,
(Revision BIR No.16/07).
3. Doma Mahadeo Gawande,
(Revision BIR No.17/07).
4. Tarachand Maruti Jambhade,
(Revision BIR No.19/07).
5. Sayaji Ganpatrao Mohite,
(Revision BIR No.23/07).
Petition stands dismissed as
abated against respondent 6. Rajmani Dhudaram Yadhav,
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Court's order dt.27.11.2015.
(Revision BIR No.28/07).
7. Walmik Motiram Waghmare,
(Revision BIR No.39/07).
8. Raju Tukaram Khumre,
(Revision BIR No.31/07).
9. Shankar Mangal Navmurti,
(Revision BIR No.34/07).
J-wp239.08.odt 2/9
Petition stands dismissed as 10. Jadhao Chaitram Khobragade,
abated against respondent (Revision BIR No.35/07).
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Court's order dt.27.11.2015.
11. Nathu Dhondbaji Takote,
(Revision BIR No.3/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.47/91).
(dead), through L.Rs.:
L.Rs. of respondent No.11 11(a) Smt. Shantabai wd/o. Natthuji Takote
taken on record i.e. respondent (b) Shri Dilip Natthuji Takote
Nos.11(a) to (e), vide Court's (c) Shri Pradeep Natthuji Takote
order dt.31.3.2008.
(d) Ku. Malti Natthuji Takote
(e) Ku. Asha Natthuji Takote
All R/o. Siraspeth, Nagpur.
12. Shriniwas Nilkanth Nandeshwar,
(Revision BIR No.4/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.48/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 12(a) Smt. Rasika wd/o. Shriniwas Nandeshwar
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Sharad Shriniwas Nandeshwar
22 are taken on record vide
(c) Namarata Shriniwas Nandeshwar
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(d) Rohan Shriniwas Nandeshwar
All R/o. Mohan Nagar, Behind Shyam Decoration,
Nagpur.
13. Chandrabhan Laxman Dongre,
(Revision BIR No.5/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.49/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 13(a) Smt. Ratnamala wd/o. Chandrabhan Dongre
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Ku. Archana Chandrabhan Dongre
22 are taken on record vide
(c) Ku. Shubhangi Chandrabhan Dongre
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(d) Roshan Chandrabhan Dongre
(e) Ashish Chandrabhan Dongre
Description of respondent All residing c/o. Shri Raju Dongre
Nos.13(a) to 13(e) is Indora Bhandar Mohalla, Sweeper Colony,
corrected as per Court's
order dt.24.9.2010.
Nagpur.
14. Sonba Dasrat Topare,
J-wp239.08.odt 3/9
(Revision BIR No.6/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.50/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 14(a) Smt. Deoki wd/o. Sonba Topre
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Manoj Sonba Topre
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(c) Deoshankar Sonba Topre
(d) Raju Sonba Topre
(e) Ku. Manda Sonba Topre
(f) Ku. Jayashree Sonba Topre
All R/o. Timki Near Topre's Well,
Timki, Nagpur.
15. Ramkrishna Tukaram Ashtankar,
(Revision BIR No.8/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.55/91).
15(a) Smt. Sushilabai wd/o. Ramkrishna Ashtankar
15(b) Smt. Kamlabai wd/o. Ramkrishna Ashtankar
L.Rs. of respondent
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (c) Anil Ramkrishna Ashtankar
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(d) Sunil Ramkrishna Ashtankar
(e) Ku. Usha Ramkrishna Ashtankar
(f) Ku. Sangita Ramkrishna Ashtankar
(g) Ku. Madhuri Ramkrishna Ashtankar
R/o. Near Corporation School,
Nirma Building, Ganeshpeth, Nagpur.
16. Vishwanath Ragho Ambade,
(Revision BIR No.12/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.56/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 16(a) Smt. Meera wd/o. Vishwanath Ambade
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Raju Vishwanath Ambade
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
R/o. C/o. Prabhabai Suryanshi's House,
Behind Adarsha Boudha Vihar,
Deleted as per Court's order Panchasheel Nagar, Nagpur.
dt.20.11.2012. 16(B) Shri Raju Vishwanath Ambade,
Amendment carried out as R/o. C/o. Smt. Prabhabai Suryawanshi House,
per Court's order Behind Adarsha Baudha Vihar,
dt.8.12.2011.
Panchsheel Nagar, Nagpur.
17. Niranjan Shrawan Gadpayale,
(Revision BIR No.13/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.57/91).
J-wp239.08.odt 4/9
L.Rs. of respondent 17(a) Smt. Rekha wd/o. Niranjan Gadpayale
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Ku. Urwashi Niranjan Gadpayale
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
All R/o. C/o. Bagde's House,
Milind Nagar, Nagpur.
Petition stands dismissed as 18. Narayan Marotrao Shelar,
abated against respondent (Revision BIR No.24/07
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Court's order dt.27.11.2015.
Arising out of BIR Case No.68/91).
18(a) Narayan Marotrao Shelar (dead)
No legal heirs.
Petition dismissed of 19. Bhanudas P. Kohad,
(Revision BIR No.25/07
respondent No.19 vide order
dt.21.1.2010.
Arising out of BIR Case No.59/91).
Petition stands dismissed as
abated against respondent
20. Kewal Wasudeorao Paunikar,
(Revision BIR No.26/07
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Arising out of BIR Case No.70/91).
Court's order dt.27.11.2015.
(Dead)
No legal heirs.
21. Mangal Tukaram Bghavne,
(Revision BIR No.27/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.71/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 21(a) Smt. Lilabai wd/o. Mangal Bhavne
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Chandrakant Mangal Bhavne
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(c) Dhanraj Mangal Bhavne
All R/o. Near Doma Gawande's House,
Shivajinagar, Nagpur.
22. Baburao Rajaram Ghadave,
(Revision BIR No.36/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.80/91).
L.Rs. of respondent 22(a) Smt. Meerabai wd/o. Baburao Ghadave
Nos.12,13,14,15,16,17,21& (b) Narendra Baburao Ghadave
22 are taken on record vide
Court's order dt.31.3.2008.
(c) Surendra Baburao Ghadave
(d) Ku. Shalini Baburao Ghadave
(e) Ku. Ratna Baburao Ghadave
All R/o. Near Pakwasa Hospital,
Mahal, Kolla, Nagpur.
J-wp239.08.odt 5/9
23. Narayan Maruti Bhanarkar,
(Revision BIR No.7/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.51/91).
24. Maruti Mahadeo Lokhande,
(Revision BIR No.10/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.54/91).
Petition stands dismissed as 25. Kashinath Binda Bakhel,
abated against respondent (Revision BIR No.11/07
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Court's order dt.27.11.2015.
Arising out of BIR Case No.55/91).
26. Babbu Abdul Rehman,
Petition of respondent
No.26 abates and disposed (Revision BIR No.15/07
of vide Court's order
dt.6.8.2013. Arising out of BIR Case No.59/91).
Petition of respondent 27. Shivdas Marotrao Bondre,
No.27 is dismissed vide (Revision BIR No.22/07
Court's order dt.21.1.2010.
Arising out of BIR Case No.66/91).
28. Tejram Kisan Tharmare,
(Revision BIR No.33/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.77/91).
29. Madan Laxmanrao Padamgirwar,
(Revision BIR No.9/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.53/91).
30. Ratan Tulshiram Hate,
(Revision BIR No.18/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.62/91).
31. Dhanraj Hari Ramteke,
(Revision BIR No.20/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.64/91).
(dead), through L.Rs.:
L.Rs. of respondent No.31 31(a) Smt. Sakhubai wd/o. Dhanraj Ramteke,
brought on record i.e. Aged about 60 years,
respondent Nos. 31(a) to
31(d), vide Court's order
Occupation : Housewife,
dt.29.9.2014. R/o. Plot No.145, Jagmohan Nagar,
behind Ambedkar Garden,
J-wp239.08.odt 6/9
Garoba Maidan, Nagpur.
31(b) Shri Shekhar s/o. Dhanraj Ramteke,
Aged about 45 years,
Occupation : Private work,
R/o. Plot No.145, Jagmohan Nagar,
behind Ambedkar Garden,
Garoba Maidan, Nagpur.
31(c) Shri Sunil Dhanraj Ramteke,
Aged about 42 years,
Occupation : Private work,
R/o. Plot No.145, Jagmohan Nagar,
behind Ambedkar Garden,
Garoba Maidan, Nagpur.
31(d) Shri Dilip s/o. Dhanraj Ramteke,
Aged Major,
Occupation : Private work,
R/o. Plot No.145, Jagmohan Nagar,
behind Ambedkar Garden,
Garoba Maidan, Nagpur.
32. Ashok Somaji Sangole,
(Revision BIR No.21/07
Arising out of BIR Case No.65/91).
(dead), through L.Rs.:
L.Rs. of respondent No.32 32(a) Lalita Ashokrao Sangole,
brought on record i.e. Aged about : Adult.
respondent Nos.32(a) to
32(e), as per Court's order
32(b) Kartik Ashokrao Sangole,
dt.14.11.2008. Aged about : Adult.
32(c) Vikas Ashokrao Sangole,
Peititon of respondent Aged about : Adult.
Nos.32(a) to 32(e) is
dismissed vide Court's order
32(d) Atul Ashokrao Sangole,
dt.21.1.2010. Aged about : Adult.
32(e) Sweta Ashokrao Sangole,
Aged about : Adult.
No.32(a) to 32(e) All R/o. C/o.
Encroachment Department,
Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur.
J-wp239.08.odt 7/9
33. Mahendra Fulchand Meshram,
Petition stands dismissed as
abated against respondent (Revision BIR No.29/07).
Nos.6,10,18,20,25&33 vide
Court's order dt.27.11.2015. Arising out of BIR Case No.73/91).
Petition of respondent 34. Badal Maruti Dhok,
No.34 is dismissed vide (Revision BIR No.32/07
Court's order dt.21.1.2010.
Arising out of BIR Case No.76/91).
All the respondents working in
Encroachment Department,
Nagpur Municipal Corporation,
Nagpur. : RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr. S.M. Puranik, Advocate for the Petitioner.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : S.B. SHUKRE, J.
th
DATE : 30
MARCH, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Puranik, learned counsel for the petitioner.
None appears for the respondent.
2. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that in one set of revision applications filed against the
order dated 20.12.2006 passed by the Judge 2 nd Labour Court,
Nagpur in B.I.R. Case No.46 to 80 of 1991, learned Member of the
Industrial Court, Nagpur remanded the complaints for their trial
J-wp239.08.odt 8/9
afresh in accordance with law, in another set of revision
applications filed against the same order passed in same cases,
rejected all the revision applications. He submits that the facts of
all these revision applications were similar and there was no reason
for the learned Member of the Industrial Court to make any
distinction between these two sets of revision applications and
accordingly passed different orders.
3. On perusal of the order passed on 9th April, 2007 in first
set of revision application and the order dated 13 th September,
2007, which is impugned herein and which has been passed in
second set of revision applications, I find that there is substance in
the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner. The
distinction made between these two sets of revision applications is
arbitrary. In both these sets of revision applications, same common
order was challenged and the facts were also similar. Many of the
complainants were not examined and the observation made in the
order dated 9th April, 2007 was to the effect that the learned Judge
of the Labour Court acted in haste in disposing of the matter. It has
also been observed that the learned trial Judge committed an error
in accepting the evidence recorded in a case which was disposed of
as abated. These observations were made in a order which was
J-wp239.08.odt 9/9
commonly passed by the learned Judge of the Labour Court and
was based upon common evidence. Therefore, no distinction
between the situations of these two sets of revision applications
could have been made by the learned Member of the Industrial
Court. Even a second set of revision applications ought to have
been allowed by quashing and setting aside the impugned order
and directing remand of the matters to the trial Court for a decision
afresh in accordance with law. The impugned order, therefore,
deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 13 th
September, 2007 is quashed and set aside.
5. It is directed that the matters be remanded back to the
trial Court for disposal in accordance with law in terms of the order
passed by the learned Member of the Industrial Court on 9th April,
2007.
6. Rule is made absolute in these terms. No costs.
JUDGE
okMksns
