Bombay High Court
Jagruti Powerloom Coop.Society vs Gayabai Arjun Kamble on 11 May, 2017
Bench: S.S. Shinde
wp4161.95
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4161 OF 1995
Jyoti Power-loom Co-operative
Society Ltd., Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Shaikh Younus Khaja,
Aged-26 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4162 OF 1995
Adarsh Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Devidas s/o Namdeo Rathod,
Aged-35 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
2
WRIT PETITION NO.4164 OF 1995
Raj Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Sitaram s/o Ganpati Rathod
Aged-38 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4165 OF 1995
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2270 OF 1999
Jagrati Power-loom Co-operative
Society Ltd.,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Smt. Kesharbai w/o Digambar Mane
Age-45 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
3
WRIT PETITION NO.4166 OF 1995
Raj Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Pandurang Satwaji Suryawanshi,
Age-55 years, Occu:Service,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4167 OF 1995
Vijay Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Bismillabee w/o Osmansaheb,
Aged-35 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4168 OF 1995
Jagruti Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
4
VERSUS
Smt. Gayabai Arjun Kamble,
Aged-32 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4169 OF 1995
Raj Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Parashram s/o Hema Pawar,
Aged-40 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4170 OF 1995
Vikas Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Dayanand s/o Malhari Shinde,
Aged-40 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
5
WRIT PETITION NO.4171 OF 1995
Jagruti Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Shahajadbee w/o Nazir Shaikh,
Aged-38 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4172 OF 1995
Vijay Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Shankar s/o Rupa Pawar,
Aged-40 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4173 OF 1995
Vijay Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
6
VERSUS
Kamalbai w/o Daulatrao Mane,
Aged-30 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4175 OF 1995
Vikas Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Husainsaheb Allabaksha,
Aged-63 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur, Dist-Latur
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4176 OF 1995
Samrat Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Nandu s/o Hema Pawar
Age-35 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o- Kanheri Laman Tanda,
Latur.
...RESPONDENT
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
7
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4178 OF 1995
Vijay Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Janabai Shrirang Shelwane,
Aged-55 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4174 OF 1995
Samrat Power-loom Co-operative
Society Latur,
Through its Liquidator,
Shri K.D. More
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
Vimal Zumbar Lohar,
Aged-35 years, Occu:Nil,
R/o-Latur.
...RESPONDENT
...
Mr.S.Y. Patil Advocate h/f. Mr. B.N. Patil
Advocate for Petitioners in all the Writ
Petitions.
None present for Respondents in all these
Writ Petitions.
...
::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2017 01:00:36 :::
wp4161.95
8
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J.
DATE : 11TH MAY 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Writ Petition No.4174 of 1995 is not on
Board. Learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioner makes oral prayer to take Writ Petition
No.4174 of 1995 on Board. Since the subject matter
of the said Writ Petition is identical with all
these Writ Petitions, the same is taken on Board
and heard along with other Writ Petitions.
1. When all these Petitions are called out
for hearing, Mr. S.Y. Patil Advocate holding for
Mr. B.N. Patil Advocate, has tendered across the
Bar the copy of the Oral Judgment delivered on 18 th
July, 2016 by the learned Single Judge of this
Court (CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) in the case
of Vikas Powerloom Co-operative Society, Latur vs.
Adinath s/o Namdeo Shinde and others (Writ
wp4161.95
Petition No.4325 of 1995 and other connected Writ
Petitions), and relying upon the said Judgment,
submits that the said Writ Petitions dismissed by
this Court were having identical/same challenge
like in the present Petitions. Therefore, he
submits that this Court may pass an appropriate
orders even in the present Writ Petitions. Copy of
the Judgment in the case of Vikas Powerloom Co-
operative Society, Latur vs. Adinath s/o Namdeo
Shinde and others (Writ Petition No.4325 of 1995
and other connected Writ Petitions) is taken on
record.
2. Upon hearing the learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioners and perusal of the
order passed by this Court in the case of Vikas
Powerloom Co-operative Society, Latur vs. Adinath
s/o Namdeo Shinde and others in Writ Petition
No.4325 of 1995 and other connected Writ
Petitions, and on comparison of the facts in the
present Writ Petitions vis-a-vis in the said Writ
wp4161.95
Petitions, I find considerable force in the
submission of learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners, that the issues/ facts involved in
those Writ Petitions and also in the present Writ
Petitions are similar/identical.
3. Upon careful perusal of the reasons
assigned by this Court in the case of Vikas
Powerloom Co-operative Society, Latur vs. Adinath
s/o Namdeo Shinde and others, supra, it appears
that reliance is placed on the ratio laid down in
the case of Baburao Dadarao Kolhe and others vs.
State of Maharashtra and others1 and it is
concluded that as the claim of the workers was not
in relation to the business of the society and was
purely a claim of wages, it was not necessary to
array the liquidator or seek permission of the
liquidator. Even if such permission was sought, it
should be granted. Upon perusal of Para 7 of the
said Judgment delivered on 18th July, 2016, it
1 2004(2) Mh.L.J. 898
wp4161.95
appears that considering the passage of time of 21
years, the Court declined to cause interference
with the impugned Judgments assailed in those Writ
Petitions. It further appears that arguments of
Mr. B.N. Patil Advocate appearing for the
Petitioners in those Writ Petitions have been
recorded in Para 3 of the said Judgment wherein
it was argued that Issue No.1 framed by the Labour
Court in the facts of that case, was not properly
considered and impugned orders therein reflects
non-application of mind. The question of
jurisdiction of entertaining the proceedings
before the Labour Court was also raised since the
Petitioner society was in liquidation, in view of
the bar contained under Section 107 of the
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
However, this Court considering the passage of
time of 21 years from filing the Petitions,
declined to entertain the said Petitions, thereby
confirming the impugned Judgments which were
assailed in those Petitions.
wp4161.95
4. Upon independent scrutiny of the grounds
raised in the present Writ Petitions, I do not
find any reason to take different view than the
view taken by the learned Single Judge of this
Court (CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) in the case
of Vikas Powerloom Co-operative Society, Latur vs.
Adinath s/o Namdeo Shinde and others, supra. In
that view of the matter, for the same reasons
which are assigned in Para 7 of the Judgment,
these Writ Petitions are devoid of merits. All the
Writ Petitions are dismissed. Rule is discharged.
5. Pending Civil Applications in all these
Writ Petitions, if any, stands disposed of.
. I appreciate the gesture shown by learned
counsel Mr. S.Y. Patil holding for Mr. B.N. Patil
Advocate appearing for Petitioners, that though
the subject matter of all these Writ Petitions is
covered by the Judgment in the case of Vikas
wp4161.95
Powerloom Co-operative Society, Latur vs. Adinath
s/o Namdeo Shinde and others, supra, he marked his
attendance and argued the Writ Petitions though
there are Summer Vacations and the Writ Petitions
pertain to the year of 1995.
[S.S. SHINDE, J.]
asb/MAY17
