The Chief Executor Officer Z.P ... vs Shri Nanasaheb Rambhau Perane & ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 6235 Bom

                                                   *1*                   237.wp.926.96.2189.04


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                                                 
                              WRIT PETITION NO. 926 OF 1997




                                                         
    The Chief Executive Officer,
    Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar.
                                              ...PETITIONER




                                                        
          -VERSUS-

    1     Shri Nanasaheb Rambhau Perane,
          R/o Waghacha Akhada,




                                             
          Tq.Rahuri, District Ahmednagar.

    2
                                 
          The State of Maharashtra.
          Through the Collector (EGS),
          Ahmednagar.
                                
                                              ...RESPONDENTS


                                         WITH 
       

                             WRIT PETITION NO.2189 OF 2004 
    



    The Chief Executive Officer,
    Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar.
                                              ...PETITIONER





          -VERSUS-

    Nanasaheb Rambhau Perne,
    Age : 54 years, Occupation : Nil,
    R/o Waghacha Akhada,





    Rahuri, Tq.Rahuri,
    District Ahmednagar.
                                              ...RESPONDENT

                                            ...
                      Advocate for Petitioner : Shri Shri S T Shelke. 
                       AGP for Respondents/ State : Shri P.N.Kutti. 
                       Advocate for Respondent 1 : Shri V.S.Bedre.




        ::: Uploaded on - 24/10/2016                     ::: Downloaded on - 26/10/2016 00:26:33 :::
                                                          *2*                    237.wp.926.96.2189.04


                                                  ...




                                                                                        
                                            CORAM:  RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 20th October, 2016

Oral Judgment :

1 In the first petition, the Petitioner has challenged the

judgment and award dated 24.09.1996 delivered by the Labour Court in

Reference (IDA) No.155/1992 vide which the Respondent was granted

reinstatement as a Mustering Assistant with continuity of service and one

third back wages from 05.04.1991. By order dated 13.03.1997, interim

relief in terms of prayer clause (C) was granted and the impugned award

was stayed. Subsequently, the petition was admitted and interim relief was

continued.

2 It is jointly submitted by the learned Advocates that the issue

of Mustering Assistants was before this Court several years ago. The

matter had also reached the Honourable Supreme Court. The State has

presented the scheme before the Honourable Supreme Court and the same

was approved. Consequentially, the Government Resolution dated

01.12.1995 was introduced so as to absorb the Mustering Assistants who

were working on Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS).

                                                        *3*                     237.wp.926.96.2189.04


    3               In pursuance to the above developments, this Court delivered 




                                                                                       

it's judgment on 15.10.1999 in Writ Petition No.703/1997 with connected

Writ Petitions in the matter of the same Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar vs.

Namdeo Natha Pawar and others. The Zilla Parishad was directed to

consider the case of the Respondents/ Employees strictly in accordance

with the scheme dated 01.12.1995.

4 This Court by it's judgment dated 21.09.2000 in the matter of

the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar vs. Daulat

Narsingrao Deshmukh, 2001(2) Mh.L.J. 543, then delivered a similar

judgment and the Petitioner was directed to consider the cases of the

employees as per the Government Resolution dated 01.12.1995. A similar

judgment dated 30.08.2001 in a group of petitions in Writ Petition

No.847/1996 was delivered by this Court.

5 In the light of the above, the first Writ Petition stands partly

allowed by replacing the impugned award dated 24.09.1996 with the

direction to the Petitioner to consider the case of the Respondents/

Employees for absorption as per the Government Resolution dated

01.12.1995. Rule is made partly absolute accordingly.

                                                              *4*                    237.wp.926.96.2189.04


           6                 Consequent to the above conclusion, the second Writ Petition 




                                                                                            

No.2189/2004 is partly allowed. The impugned order dated 19.07.2003

does not survive and is, therefore, set aside. Complaint (ULP) No.76/1997

is disposed of. Rule is made partly absolute accordingly.

7 In the light of the above, Criminal Complaint (ULP)

No.26/2003 filed by the Respondent does not survive and stands disposed

of.

    kps                                                       (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)