The Joint Director vs Satyafula W/O Balaji Tirpude
2017 Latest Caselaw 923 Bom

                                1                           wp2467,2472,2474.06




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                  

                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


 WRIT PETITION NO. 2467 OF 2006


 1) The Joint Director,
     Department of Social Forestry,
     Near G.P.O., Civil Lines, Nagpur-10.

 2) The Deputy Director,
     Department of Social Forestry, 
     Nagpur Division, Civil Lines, Nagpur.

 3) The Plantation Officer,
     Social Forestry, Range, Hingna.

 4) The Government of Maharashtra,
     through it's Secretary, Village 
     Development Jalsandharan and 
     Social Forestry Department, Mantralaya,
     Mumbai-32.                                       ....       PETITIONERS


                     VERSUS


 Shri Sharad s/o Bakaram Titarmare,
 Aged about 22 years, 
 Social Forestry Nursery at Seminary
 Hills, Nagpur.                                       ....       RESPONDENT

 ______________________________________________________________

  Shri A.A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for the petitioners, 
                        None for the respondent.
  ______________________________________________________________

                                    WITH




::: Uploaded on - 30/03/2017                 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 20:31:39 :::
                                 2                             wp2467,2472,2474.06




 WRIT PETITION NO. 2472 OF 2006


 1) The Joint Director,
     Department of Social Forestry,
     Near G.P.O., Civil Lines, Nagpur-10.

 2) The Deputy Director,
     Department of Social Forestry, 
     Nagpur Division, Civil Lines, Nagpur.

 3) The Plantation Officer,
     Social Forestry, Range, Hingna.

 4) The Government of Maharashtra,
     through it's Secretary, Village 
     Development Jalsandharan and 
     Social Forestry Department, Mantralaya,
     Mumbai-32.                                         ....       PETITIONERS


                   VERSUS


 Smt. Satyafula w/o Balaji Tirpude,
 Aged about 35 years, 
 Social Forestry Nursery at Airport, Nagpur.            ....       RESPONDENT


                                    WITH


 WRIT PETITION NO. 2474 OF 2006


 1) The Joint Director,
     Department of Social Forestry,
     Near G.P.O., Civil Lines, Nagpur-10.

 2) The Deputy Director,
     Department of Social Forestry, 
     Nagpur Division, Civil Lines, Nagpur.


::: Uploaded on - 30/03/2017                   ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 20:31:39 :::
                                        3                              wp2467,2472,2474.06




 3) The Plantation Officer,
     Social Forestry, Range, Hingna.

 4) The Government of Maharashtra,
     through it's Secretary, Village 
     Development Jalsandharan and 
     Social Forestry Department, Mantralaya,
     Mumbai-32.                                                 ....       PETITIONERS


                   VERSUS


 Shri Mahendra s/o Maroti Moon,
 Aged about 29 years, 
 Social Forestry Nursery at Airport, Nagpur.                    ....       RESPONDENT

 ______________________________________________________________

    Shri N.R. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for the petitioners, 
                         None for the respondents.
  ______________________________________________________________


                               CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.

DATED : 21 MARCH, 2017.

st

ORAL JUDGMENT :

Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for the

petitioners/employer. None for the respondents/employees.

2. The employers have challenged the order passed by the

Industrial Court partly allowing the complaints filed by the employees,

quashing the order of retrenchment and directing the employer to give

4 wp2467,2472,2474.06

preference to the complainants/employees for conferral of benefits of

permanency on availability of posts, according to the seniority of the

complainants/employees considering the services of the

complainants/employees from 1990.

3. In paragraph No.11 of the impugned order, it is recorded

that the complainants/employees were engaged from 1990 till

15-12-1995 on which date they were retrenched. It is further recorded

that the complainants/employees have worked for more than 240 days

in each year from April 1991.

With the above findings, the Industrial Court has granted

relief to the complainants/employees.

The employer has not been able to show that the findings

recorded are not proper or are unsustainable.

4. This Court while admitting the Writ Petition

No.2467/2006, by the order passed on 22-08-2006, rejected the prayer

of the employer for interim order. In Writ Petition No.2472/2006 and

Writ Petition No.2474/2006 though the petitioners have prayed for

interim orders, while issuing Rule interim orders are not granted. The

Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, has submitted that the

5 wp2467,2472,2474.06

proposal for regularising the services of the employees as per the

Government Resolution dated 22-08-2014 is under consideration of

the State Government and if it is found that the employees fulfill the

criteria, action will be taken accordingly.

5. In the above facts, I see no reason to keep these writ

petitions pending. There is no reason to interfere with the impugned

order.

The petitions are dismissed. In the circumstances, the

parties to bear their own costs.

JUDGE adgokar