Baban Narayanrao Wanwe vs National Textile Corpn.& Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 6963 Bom

                                                  1              wp2183.02.odt

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

                          WRIT PETITION NO. 2183 OF 2002

            Baban Narayanrao Wanwe,
            Vivekanand Colony, Near Vidarbha Mills,
            Achalpur, Distt. Amravati               ...... PETITIONER

                                  ...VERSUS...

 1.         National Textile Corporation (MN) Limited,
            Subsidiary of N.T.C. - Wholly owned 
            Company of the Government of India,
            15, N.M.Marg, Mumbai, through its
            Chairman-cum-Managing Director,

 2.      Vidarbha Mills Berar,
         Achalpur, Distt. Amravati,
         through its General Manager......                              RESPONDENTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 None for Petitioner.
 Shri Mihir Puranik, counsel for Respondent no.  2
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, AND
                                        MANISH PITALE, JJ.

th DATE : 8 SEPTEMBER, 2017 .

ORAL JUDGMENT (P.C.)

1] None appears for the petitioner. Shri Puranik, the

learned counsel appears for respondent No.2.

2] Shri Puranik has invited out attention to the

Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of National

Textile Corporation Ltd and ors vrs. Union of India, through

the Ministry of Textile & ors, reported in 2003 II CLR 619,

2 wp2183.02.odt

wherein this Court has held that, "we find no justification for

setting aside the action of the National Textile Corporation of

rolling-back the retirement age from 60 years to 58 years of

the below board level employees".

3] It is not in dispute that the petitioner pertains to

the category of "below board level employees". The

controversy is, therefore, covered by the aforesaid decision

of this Court.

4] In view of the fact that the petitioner was an

employee below board level, the fact that at the time of

employment, he was governed by the provisions of Bombay

Industrial Relations Act would not have any significance.

Apart from this, the controversy is covered by the another

decision of the Division Bench of this Court, delivered on

14.10.2004 in Writ Petition No. 2736 of 2003 (Haripratap

Nandbhadur Singh vrs. The National Textile Corporation

(Maharashtra North) Limited and Anr).

5] In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed.

                                JUDGE                              JUDGE
 Rvjalit