Bombay High Court
Peoples Education Society ... vs Deelip Ramrao Behere on 20 October, 2016
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
*1* 917.wp.799.97
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 799 OF 1997
1 People's Education Society,
Mandane, Tq.Shahada,
District Dhule.
Through Chairman.
2 Adarsh Vidyalaya Mandane,
Tq.Shahada, Dist.Dhule.
Through Headmaster.
...PETITIONERS
-VERSUS-
1 Deelip Ramrao Behare,
R/o Mandane, Tq.Shahada,
District Dhule.
2 The Education Officer,
Zilha Parishad, Dhule.
...RESPONDENTS
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Shri S.P.Brahme and Shri A.R.Syed.
None for the Respondents.
...
CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
DATE :- 20th October, 2016
Oral Judgment :
1 The Petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment of the School
Tribunal dated 27.02.1996 by which Dhule Appeal No.35/1994 filed by
the Respondent/ Employee was allowed and he was granted reinstatement
*2* 917.wp.799.97
with all pecuniary benefits and the absence from the date of termination
till reinstatement was to be adjusted against the leave credited to his
account.
2 While admitting this petition on 03.04.1997, this Court
granted interim relief only to the extent of staying the payment of back
wages on the condition that the amount of 50% of back wages would be
deposited in this Court. The reinstatement was not stayed.
3 It is informed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, on
instructions, that the Respondent was thereafter, reinstated in service and
50% back wages calculated at Rs.75,503/- were deposited in this Court on
15.09.2001. The said amount of back wages has already been withdrawn
by the Respondent/ Employee.
4 None appears for the Respondent inspite of an adjournment
on earlier date. This matter was filed on 18.06.1996 and is taken up for
final hearing after more than 20 years.
5 Considering the subsequent events and the fact that the
learned Division Bench of this Court did not, at prima facie stage, find any
perversity in the direction of reinstatement and since the Respondent has,
*3* 917.wp.799.97
thereafter, been reinstated, I deem it inappropriate to consider the
challenge as against the said direction at this stage since the Respondent
has been working for more than two decades and has settled in
employment.
6 Insofar as the back wages are concerned, Shri Brahme has
strenuously submitted that the principle of "no work no pay" should be
made applicable in this case. An employee cannot be paid wages when he
has not worked. He further submits that the Educational Society would be
required to suffer financial burden and hence, the direction to pay back
wages should be set aside.
7 The Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Nicholas
Piramal India Limited v/s Hari Singh, 2015 (2) CLR 468, has concluded
that grant of 50% back wages would be an appropriate relief to reduce
the rigours of litigation suffered by an employee on account of the illegal
termination at the hands of the employer. The Petitioner has already
deposited an amount equivalent to 50% of the back wages and the said
amount has already been withdrawn by the Respondent/ Employee under
the orders of this Court.
8 As such, this Writ Petition is partly allowed. While sustaining
*4* 917.wp.799.97
the directions of reinstatement and continuity in service, the direction to
pay 100% back wages is modified as set out in the foregoing paragraph.
9 Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.
10 Needless to state, in the event the amount deposited by the
Petitioner as recorded above is not withdrawn by the
Respondent/Employee, he shall be at liberty to withdraw the said amount
with accrued interest by producing a recent colour photograph along with
identity proof in the nature of the Election Commission of India's Voter
Identity Card and an application for withdrawal duly identified by his
Advocate.
kps (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
