Bombay High Court
State Of Mah.Thru Ex.Engr.Upper ... vs Bhagwan Jagnath Gite And Anr on 23 June, 2017
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2603 OF 1998
1. The State of Maharashtra
2. The Executive Engineer,
Upper Pravara Canal,
Division, Ahmednagar - PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. Bhagwan Jagnath Gite,
Gitewadi, Post : Chincholi,
Tq.Pathardi, Dist.Ahmednagar
2. The Presiding Officer,
2nd Labour Court, Ahmednagar - RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.5177 OF 2001
Bhagwan Jagannath Gite,
Age-41 years, Occu-Nil,
R/o at Gitewadi,
Post : Chichandi, Tq. Pathardi,
Dist. Ahmednagar - PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
2. The Executive Engineer,
Uppar Pravara Canal Division,
Ahmednagar,
3. The Presiding Officer,
2nd Labour Court,
Ahmednagar - RESPONDENTS
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
Mr.N.T.Bhagat, AGP for the petitioner.
Mr.N.C.Garud, Advocate for respondent No.1.
( CORAM : Ravindra V.Ghuge, J.)
DATE : 23/06/2017
PER COURT :
Writ Petition No.2603 of 1998
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and award dated
25/09/1997 by which the Labour Court has passed the following
order :
"Reference is partly allowed.
The first party is directed to take the workman as a Muster
Assistant from the date of order, without continuity of
service and back wages. Parties to bear their respective
costs.
Date : 25/09/1997
Ahmednagar"
2. I have considered the submissions of the learned Advocates for
the respective sides. The prayer of the workman for reinstatement
has been accepted by the Labour Court. Continuity and back wages
have been denied. The respondent was working as a 'Mustering
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
Assistant'.
3. With regard to the 'Mustering Assistant' in the State of
Maharashtra, the said issue had reached the Hon'ble Apex Court in a
group of matters. Several judgments were delivered by this Court
prior thereto with regard to the continued employment of Mustering
Assistants and the matters regarding their regularization in service.
The Hon'ble Apex Court had permitted the State of Maharashtra to
prepare a scheme for regularizing the employment of Mustering
Assistants.
4. By order dated 02/12/1996, the learned 3 Judges Bench of the
Hon'ble Apex Court has passed the following order in Civil Appeal
No.15339/1996 :-
"Special leave granted.
The impugned order of the High Court dated 22 nd March 1991 is
set aside and we direct that the question of absorption into the
regular service shall be governed by the scheme prepared by the
State Government contained in the Government Resolution dated
01/12/1995. We have approved the scheme and we direct that
all the employee who fall within the parameters of the scheme
should be similarly treated so that the possibility of individuals
coming for redress under the scheme may not arise as that
would only crave avoidable litigation.
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
The appeal will stand disposed of accordingly with no order as
to costs."
5. Pursuant thereto, the State of Maharashtra has undertaken
the exercise of regulating and regularizing the services of Mustering
Assistants. By judgment dated 18/08/21001 and 30/08/2001
delivered by this Court in WP No.703/1997 and several connected
matters, the State Government was directed to consider the claims of
the Mustering Assistants for absorption in regular service as per the
scheme prescribed by GR dated 01/12/1995. The judgments of the
Industrial Court were set aside. Paragraph No.17 of the judgment of
this Court dated 30/08/2001 is reproduced hereinbelow :-
"In the result, petitions are allowed. The judgment and order
passed by the Member of the Industrial Court, Ahmednagar,
dated 29/12/1994, in Complaint (ULP) Nos. 9/1991, 41/1989,
40/1989, 240/1989, 151/1989, 27/1989, 89/1989, 661/1989,
98/1989, 193/1989, 522/1989, 53/1989, 45/1989, 120/1989,
43/1989, 427/1989, 15/1990, 16/1989, 19/1989, 28/1989,
22/1989, 398/1989, 83/1990 and 88/1989, is quashed and set
aside. However, the petitioners shall consider the claim of the
respondents for absorption in regular service in accordance with
the scheme prepared by the State Government contained in
Government Resolution dated 1st December 1995, so also in
accordance with the norms laid down in the Government
Resolution dated 21st April 1999."
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
6. Considering the above, this petition is partly allowed. The
impugned award dated 25/09/1997 is quashed and set aside and
Ref.(IDA) No.55/1993 stands answered in the negative. Akin to the
directions of this Court reproduced above, petitioner No.2 shall
prepare the proposal of the respondent/employee within a period of 6
(six) weeks from today and forward the same to the appropriate
department of the State Government for consideration of his case as
per the GR dated 01/12/1995. Needless to state, if the respondent is
entitled to any benefits under the said GR, the petitioner shall initiate
necessary steps within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt
of the proposal.
7. Learned Advocate for the employee submits that the address
mentioned in the petition is the address for correspondence. Rule is
made partly absolute in the above terms.
Writ Petition No.5177 of 2001
8. Learned Advocate for the workman, who is the petitioner in WP
No.5177/2001 submits that this petition was being tagged with WP
No.2603/1998 and both the matters were being heard together under
the order of this Court dated 24/04/2017.
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
9. He, therefore, submits that considering the above order, the
second petition filed by the workman would not survive and can be
disposed of.
10. As such, the second petition stands disposed of. Rule is
discharged in the second petition.
11. Pending civil application stands disposed of.
( Ravindra V.Ghuge, J.)
khs/JUNE 2017/2603
