Riyazoddin S/O Shamsoddin Qazi vs Maharashtra State Cooperative ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 9745 Bom

                                                                                1                                                                wp4289.15

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


                                                        WRIT PETI  TION NO.4289/2015 


Riyazoddin S/o Shamsoddin Qazi,
aged about 66 Yrs., Occu. Service, 
R/o Paradise Colony, Walgaon Road, 
Amravati, Taluka and Distt. Amravati.                                                                                                                         ..Petitioner.

             ..Vs..

Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton
Growers Marketing Federation Limited, 
through Its Managing Director, Cotton
Complex, Ajani Chowk, Nagpur.                                                                                                                    ..Respondent.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
            Shri M.R. Pillai, Advocate for the petitioner. 
            Shri C.V. Kale, Advocate for the respondent.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 



                                                                CORAM :  Z.A. HAQ, J.

                                                                DATE  :     18.12.2017.



ORLA JUDGMENT

1. Heard Shri M.R. Pillai, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri C.V.

Kale, Advocate for the respondent.

2. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Industrial

Court by which the application (Exh. No.16) filed by him seeking permission to

amend the complaint is rejected.

3. The petitioner / employee has filed complaint under Section 28 read

2 wp4289.15

with Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade

Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 praying for

declaration that the employer is indulging in unfair labour practice by

depriving the complainant of the salary as per the recommendations of 5 th Pay

Commission. As the trial progressed, the complainant filed the application

(Exh. No.16) seeking permission to bring on record the names of the other

employees, who according to the complainant are junior to him but their

services are regularised. The complainant further sought to incorporate the

pleadings regarding his entitlement for the benefits as per recommendations of

"Bhuibhar Committee".

4. The employer opposed the amendment application. The Industrial

Court has rejected the application observing that if the complainant is

permitted to amend the complaint then the nature of complaint would change.

5. After considering the claim made by the petitioner in the complaint,

and the proposed amendment, I find that the conclusions of the Industrial

Court are unsustainable and it cannot be said that the nature of complaint

would change if the complainant is permitted to amend the complaint.

6. Hence, the following order:

(i)          The impugned order is set aside.



                                                        3                                                                wp4289.15

(ii)                   The application (Exh. No.16) filed by the complainant is allowed.

(iii)                  At   this   stage,   learned   Advocate   for   the   employer   objected   for 

directing that application (Exh. No.16) stands allowed, and it is pointed out

that there is no prayer in the writ petition to that effect.

The objection raised by the advocate of the employer is

misconceived. This Court can always mould the relief while disposing the

matter.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

The respondent shall pay costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand) to

the petitioner and produce the receipt of it on record of the Industrial Court

within one month, failing which the Industrial Court may pass appropriate

orders considering it to be non-compliance of the order of this Court.

JUDGE

Tambaskar.