Bombay High Court
Chief Executive Officer Z.P.Beed vs Kashinath Yeshwanta Popale And ... on 12 May, 2017
Bench: R.V. Ghuge
WP/5950/1999 & ANR
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5950 OF 1999
Zilla Parishad, Beed,
Through its Chief
Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Beed. ..Petitioner
Versus
1. Baban Asaraji Pokale
Age major, C/o Trade
Union Centre, Bashirganj,
Beed.
2. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6144 OF 1999
Zilla Parishad, Beed,
Through its Chief
Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Beed. ..Petitioner
Versus
1. Kashinath Yeshwanta Popale,
Age major, C/o Trade
Union Centre, Bashirganj,
Beed.
2. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents
...
Advocate for Petitioner : None present.
AGP for Respondent 2 : Shri N.T.Bhagat
Advocate for Respondent 1 : Shri Pradeep Shahane
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
Dated: May 12, 2017
...
WP/5950/1999 & ANR
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. None appeared for the petitioner on 8.5.2017, 9.5.2017 and
even today.
2. The petitioner / Zilla Parishad in both these identical petitions
has challenged the award dated 18.9.1996 in Reference (IDA) No. 135
of 1990 and award dated 11.12.1997 in Reference (IDA) No.117 of
1992, by which, the respondents were granted reinstatement with
continuity and full backwages.
3. I have considered the submissions of Shri Shahane, who has
strenuously supported the impugned award. I have gone through the
grounds raised by the petitioner in the memo of the petition.
4. Shri Shahane submits that during the pendency of these
petitions and in the light of the interim relief granted by this Court
to the petitioner, by staying the backwages and continuity of service,
the petitioner has absorbed the respondents on Converted Regular
Temporary Establishment (CRTE) after reinstating them and they
have continued in employment.
5. Shri Shahane supports his statement on the basis of the
Government Resolution dated 28.2.2006, issued by the State
Government in relation to the petitioner / Zilla Parishad, wherein
WP/5950/1999 & ANR
the names of these respondents are mentioned. Copy of the said
Government Resolution along with the annexures is taken on record
and marked Exhibit "X" collectively.
6. There is no dispute that these respondents were working on
daily wages and according to the statement of the learned counsel
for the respondents, have been given benefits of the Kalelkar
Settlement. In my view, they cannot be paid full backwages by
applying the principle of "No work no wages". As such, I find that
these petitions deserve to be allowed to the extent of setting aside
the direction to pay backwages. Considering the subsequent events
during the pendency of this petitions, continuity of service without
backwages can be granted.
7. As such, both these petitions are partly allowed. The direction
of the Labour Court in both the impugned awards granting full
backwages is quashed and set aside. The direction granting
continuity of service with reinstatement is sustained in the light of
the subsequent events.
8. Rule is made partly absolutely in both these petitions
( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )
...
akl/d
