The State Of Mah.And Ors vs Sahebrao Siddeshwar Kakade
2016 Latest Caselaw 5980 Bom

                                                                      WP/653/1997
                                            1

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                                             
                              WRIT PETITION NO. 653 OF 1997




                                                     
     1. State of Maharashtra

     2. Executive Engineer,
     Public Works Department,




                                                    
     Padampura, Aurangabad.                     ..Petitioners

     Versus

     Sahebrao Siddeswar Kakde




                                          
     Age major, Occupation Nil,
     r/o at Post Bhendala, Taluka
                             
     Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad.                      ..Respondent

                                         ...
                        AGP for Petitioners : Shri Kutti P.N.
                            
                   Advocate for Respondent : Shri Pahune Patil N.J.
                                         ...

                              CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

Dated: October 13, 2016 ...

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

1. The petitioners have challenged the ex-parte award dated

29.2.1996, by which, Reference (IDA) No.2 of 1995 has been allowed

and the petitioners are directed to reinstate the respondent with

continuity, full backwages and pay Rs.750/- as compensation.

2. I have considered the submissions of the learned Advocates for

the respective sides.

3. It is evident from the impugned award that besides filing an

WP/653/1997

affidavit, by way of examination-in-chief, there was no material

before the Labour Court to conclude that the respondent had

completed 240 days in continuous service in between 8.2.1985 to

1.9.1986. The conclusions drawn by the Labour Court are that, "It

would not by any exaggeration to mention here that, in the fitness

of things the Court is also inclined to grant the second party

workman full relief, in addition to it, heavy costs of Rs.750/- each

to be deducted from the payment of the concerned personnel of the

first party employer, responsible officer concerned for the said

lapse, and it be paid as compensation to the second party workman

concerned in these three references, respectively." In my view such

conclusions by the Labour Court are unsustainable in law.

4. It emerges from the record that the respondent is out of

employment for the last 30 years, after having worked for about a

year. In these circumstances, there could be no relief of

reinstatement in service, more so, when there was no evidence

before the Labour Court to make out a case of illegal retrenchment.

5. In my view the ratio laid down by the Honourable Supreme

Court in the following four cases would be applicable to this case:-

1. Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan State Agriculture Marketing Board, Sub-Division, Kota Vs. Mohanlal [2013 LLR 1009],

WP/653/1997

2. Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan Development Corporation and

another Vs. Gitam Singh [(2013) 5 SCC 136],

3. BSNL Vs. Man Singh [(2012) 1 SCC 558] and

4. Jagbir Singh Vs. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board

[(2009) 15 SCC 327].

6. In the light of the above, this petition is partly allowed. The

impugned award dated 29.2.1996 is quashed and set aside.

Considering the effect of Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act,

1947, I am granting compensation of Rs.40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand

only/-) to the respondent and Reference (IDA) No.2 of 1995 stands

disposed off in view of the said compensation. The petitioner shall

pay the said compensation to the respondent within a period of

twelve weeks from today, failing which, the amount shall carry

interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decision and

the amount of interest shall then be recovered from the Executive

Engineer of the Public Works Department, Aurangabad.

7. Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) ...

akl/d