State Of Maha. Thr The Exe. Eng. ... vs Suresh S/O Pralhadrao Asatkar
2017 Latest Caselaw 2221 Bom

                                 1
                                                           wp4647.09.odt

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

                    Writ Petition No.4647 of 2009

1. State of Maharashtra,
   through the Executive Engineer,
   Public Works Division,
   Amravati.

2. The Sub-Divisional Engineer,
   Public Works Division No.1,
   Amravati.                                    ... Petitioners

     Versus

Suresh s/o Pralhadrao Asatkar,
Aged about 25 years,
R/o C/o Keshavrao Palskar,
Amba Vihar, Amravati.                           ... Respondent



Shri S.B. Bissa, Assistant Government Pleader for Petitioners.
Shri S.G. Jagtap, Advocate for Respondent.



             Coram : R.K. Deshpande, J.

th Dated : 4 May, 2017

wp4647.09.odt

Oral Judgment :

1. In Reference I.D.A. Case No.53 of 1996, the Labour

Court, Amravati, passed an award on 15-7-2006 setting aside the

termination of the respondent dated 26-12-1986 and directing

reinstatement in service with 50% back wages and continuity.

Hence, the employer-State Government is before this Court in

this writ petition.

2. On 23-2-2010, this Court passed an order as under :

" Heard Shri Kothari, learned AGP for the

petitioner.

Rule. Hearing expedited.

Shri Jagtap, learned counsel for the respondent has

pointed out that the respondent is already reinstated from

26.09.2006. In view of this statement, his status and

position should not be disturbed during the pendency of

writ petition.

Stay of payment of back wages only.

wp4647.09.odt

Shri Jagtap, learned counsel waives notice for the

respondent."

3. It is reported that since 26-9-2006, the respondent was

working with the petitioners as daily wager and he attained the

age of superannuation in the month of August, 2016. In view of

this, the order directing reinstatement in service cannot be

disturbed. However, there is no basis for award of back wages by

the Labour Court. Hence, the order of the Labour Court to that

extent shall have to be set aside.

4. In the result, the petition is partly allowed. The award

dated 15-7-2006 passed by the Labour Court, Amravati, in

Reference I.D.A. Case No.53 of 1996, is hereby quashed and set

aside only to the extent it directs payment of 50% of back wages

to the respondent.

5. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to

costs.

Judge.

Lanjewar