State Of Mah vs Youraj Pundlik Patil
2017 Latest Caselaw 2525 Bom

                                                  *1*                          112.wp.2770.02


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO.2770 OF 2002

1         The State of Maharashtra.
          Through
          The Plantation Officer,
          Social Forestry, Amalner,
          District Jalgaon.

2         The Deputy Director,
          Social Forestry, Jalgaon.
                                                    ...PETITIONERS

          -VERSUS-

Youraj Pundlik Patil,
Age : 35 years, Occupation : Service,
R/o At Dhar, Taluka Amalner,
District Jalgaon.
                                                    ...RESPONDENT

                                            ...
                     Shri N.T.Bhagat, AGP, for the Petitioners/ State.
                                            ...

                                       CORAM:  RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 12th May, 2017

Oral Judgment :

1 The Petitioners are aggrieved by the judgment dated

10.04.2002 delivered by the Industrial Court, Jalgaon by which Complaint

(ULP) No.1211/1999 (old No.720/1996) has been partly allowed. The

Petitioners are directed to pay the difference of wages and terminal

*2* 112.wp.2770.02

benefits for the period August, 1996 to 31.03.1999.

2 While admitting this petition on 06.08.2002, this Court

refused the interim relief to the Petitioners and observed that the amount,

if paid to the Respondent, will be subject to the result of this petition. The

Respondent has filed an undertaking on 22.01.2003.

3 The learned AGP has strenuously criticized the impugned

judgment and has prayed that the same be quashed and set aside.

4              None has appeared for the Respondent.



5              I   have   considered   the   submissions  of   the   learned   AGP   and 

have gone through the petition paper book with his assistance.

6 The issue is with regard to the payment of difference amount

of wages and terminal benefits. The oral and documentary evidence was

adduced before the Industrial Court. The Industrial Court has considered

the said evidence in extenso from paragraph 9 till paragraph 19. It was on

the basis of the oral and documentary evidence that the Industrial Court

concluded that the Petitioners ought to pay the difference of wages for the

period August, 1996 till 31.03.1999. As the Respondent had performed

*3* 112.wp.2770.02

the work that was done by the permanent employees, the Industrial Court

concluded that he needs to be paid the same amount of wages as the

permanent employees were being paid.

7 The learned AGP submits that by the Demand Draft dated

12.12.2002 an amount of Rs.69,344/- was deposited in this Court and the

said amount has been withdrawn by the Respondent pursuant to the order

dated 01.04.2003 passed by this Court in Civil Application No.2128/2003.

8 In the light of the above, this Writ Petition being devoid of

merit is, therefore, dismissed. Rule is discharged.

kps                                                          (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)