Kaluram Mangalchand Adchitre vs Municipal Council Jalna ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 2532 Bom

                                                                  WP/4152/2000
                                        1

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                           BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 4152 OF 2000

 Kaluram Mangalchand Adchitre,
 Age 48 years, Occ. Nil
 R/o Opp. Slaughter House
 Ramnagar, Jalna.                                  ..Petitioner

 Versus

 Municipal Council, Jalna
 Through its Chief Officer
 Jalna.                                            ..Respondent
                                      ...
                Advocate for Petitioner : Shri Pradeep Shahane
                                      ...

                          CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

Dated: May 12, 2017 ...

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

1. None appeared for the respondent on 9.5.2017 and today.

2. The petitioner has challenged the judgment of the Labour

Court dated 7.8.1995, by which his Complaint (ULP) No.37 of 1988

was partly allowed by granting backwages for the period 2.8.1980 to

20.8.1988. He was denied reinstatement in service and continuity.

3. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the judgment of the

Industrial Court dated 30.7.1999, by which, his Revision (ULP) No.44

of 1996 was dismissed and by allowing Revision (ULP) No. 80 of 1995

filed by the respondent, backwages were granted for the period

WP/4152/2000

2.2.1981 till 20.8.1988.

4. I have considered the strenuous submissions of Shri Shahane,

who has submitted that both the impugned judgments are perverse

and erroneous. The petitioner could not have been denied

reinstatement and continuity in service.

5. It appears that the respondent / Corporation has not

challenged the judgment of the industrial Court by which, the

petitioner is granted backwages for the period 2.2.1981 till

20.8.1988.

6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had worked on daily

wages as a Watchman with the respondent from 4.3.1978. He was

arrested by the Police on 2.8.1980 on the charge of having

committed an offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

He was convicted by the trial Court and he preferred an appeal

before this Court which was partly allowed and he was sentenced to

pay fine of Rs.500/-, after being acquitted of the charge under

Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and upon being convicted of the

charge under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.

7. There is no dispute that the petitioner is out of employment

from 2.8.1980 for a period of about 37 years He was about 30 years

WP/4152/2000

old in 1988 and would be about 60 years old today.

8. Considering the concurrent judgments of the Labour Court and

the Industrial Courts depriving the petitioner of reinstatement and

continuity in service and keeping in view his conviction, I do not find

that this petition needs to be entertained only because a second view

or a different view could be taken.

9. In the light of the above, this petition is dismissed. Rule is

discharged.

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

...

akl/d