Shyamsunder S/O Ganesh Padgilwar vs Zilla Parishad Yavatmal Thr. ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 6307 Bom

                                        1                                                      wp5025.16 (J).odt

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR




                                                                                                 
                            WRIT PETITION NO.5025 OF 2016




                                                                      
    Shyamsunder s/o Ganesh Padgilwar,
    Aged about 50 years,
    R/o. Panchayat Samiti,
    Ghatanji, District-Yavatmal.                                 ..               Petitioner




                                                                     
                    .. Versus..

    Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal,




                                                   
    Through its Chief Executive Officer,
    Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal.      ig                            ..               Respondent

                          ..........
    Shri C.V. Jagdale, Advocate for petitioner,
                                 
    Shri V.B. Bhise, Advocate for respondent.
                          ..........

                                    CORAM :  A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

DATED : OCTOBER 24, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1] Considering the limited controversy involved, the writ petition

is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2] The petitioner is aggrieved by the interim order passed by the

Industrial Court dated 8.7.2016 whereby it refused to stay the order of

transfer dated 18.5.2016. By the said order, the petitioner was

transferred from Panchayat Samiti, Ghatanji to Panchayat Samiti

Babhulgaon.

3] Shri Jagdale, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits

that though the order of transfer has been challenged by filing complaint

2 wp5025.16 (J).odt

before the Industrial Court, the petitioner has joined at the place of

transfer without prejudice to his rights and contentions. He, therefore,

submits that if the complaint itself is decided on merits, the same would

serve the interests of justice.

4] Shri Bhise, the learned counsel for the respondent, supported

the impugned order and submitted that the Industrial Court was justified

in refusing to grant any interim relief.

5] Considering the facts of the case and as the petitioner has

joined the place of transfer without prejudice to his rights and

contentions, the interests of justice will be served by passing the

following order :

(i) The order dated 8.7.2016 passed below Exh.U-2 is not interfered

with.

(ii) The proceedings in Complaint No.80/2016 pending before the

Industrial Court, Yavatmal shall be decided expeditiously and by the end

of March, 2017.

(iii) The complaint shall be decided on its own merit without being

influenced by the observations made in the order dated 8.7.2016.

(iv) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

JUDGE Gulande, PA