Joharbee Miya Murtuja vs The Superintending Engineer And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 436 Bom

                                                                                 WP 2121/09  
      
                                                   -  1 -

             




                                                                                    
                
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                        
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD                                                  
                                                  

                                              WRIT PETITION NO.2121/2009




                                                       
                                        Joharbee Miya Murtuja.  
                                                          ...Petitioner..




                                               
                             Versus
                                   ig   The Superintending Engineer
                                        and Competent Authority. 
                                 
                                                          ...Respondent... 
                                                                           

                              .....
    Shri B.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner.
      


    Shri A.S. Bajaj, Advocate for respondent. 
                              .....
   



      

                                                 CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. 
                                                   





                                                 DATE:  08.03.2016


    ORDER :

1] I have heard this matter for quite some time.

The petitioner has been terminated on 13.3.2006 for

proved mis-conducts. She has attained the age of

superannuation in 2011 and is presently 65 years old.

2] Apparently, the law laid down by this Court in

WP 2121/09

- 2 -

the matters of Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton

Growers Marketing Federation Ltd. v. Vasant Ambadas

Deshpande (2014 I CLR 878) and MSRTC, Beed v. Syed

Saheblal (2014 III CLR 547), which is based on the

judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Workmen of Motipur Sugar Factory (P) Ltd. v. Motipur

Sugar Factory (P) Ltd. (AIR 1965 SC 1803); Workmen of

Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd. v.

Management (AIR 1973 SC 1227); Bharat Forge Co.Ltd. v.

A.B. Zodge (AIR 1996 SC 1556) and Delhi Cloth and General

Mills Co.Ltd. v. Ludh Budh Singh (AIR 1972 SC 1031), has

not been followed by the Labour Court. The findings of

the Enquiry Officer are held to be perverse and the

enquiry is set aside in the same judgment dated

16.10.2008 by which the complaint has been partly allowed

granting reinstatement with continuity and 90% back wages

to the petitioner.

3] The petitioner, therefore, proposes that the

petitioner would bring this dispute to an end by waiving

entire back wages subject to grant of continuity of

service from the date of termination i.e. 13.3.2006 till

the date of retirement and retiral benefits.

WP 2121/09

- 3 -

4] Shri Bajaj, learned Advocate for the respondent,

prays for some time to take instructions.

    5]               S.O. to 28.3.2016. 




                                               
                                             (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) 
                             
                




                                       
                                  
                                 
      
   






    ndk/c831615.doc