Bombay High Court
Mumbai Port Trust Non Sc/St ... vs The Board Of Trustees Of Mumbai ... on 26 February, 2021
Bench: K.K. Tated, R. I. Chagla
26. CONPW(L) 3123-21 IN WP 1164-12.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (L) NO. 3123 OF 2021
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1164 OF 2012
Mumbai Port Trust
Non SC/ST Employees
Association & Anr. ..... Petitioners
Vs.
The Board of Trustees of
Mumbai Port Trust & Ors. ..... Respondents
Mr. V. Y. Sanglikar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. Anand Pai with Ms. Sneha Pandey i/b Motiwala & Co.,
Advocate for Respondents.
CORAM: K.K.TATED &
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATED : FEBRUARY 26, 2021
P.C.
1. Heard learned counsel for parties.
2. By this Contempt Petition, the petitioner urged that
the respondent has failed and neglected to comply the order
dated 30th November 2016 and 1st December 2016, passed by
this Court in Writ Petition No. 1164 of 2012.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that by
these orders, this Court has directed the respondents to
comply the order of the Apex Court in the matter of M.
Nagraj and Ors Vs. Union of India and Ors. (2006) 8 SCC
212. He has relyed of paragraph 70 and 71 of the order,
Nikita Gadgil
1/5
::: Uploaded on - 03/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2021 00:33:00 :::
26. CONPW(L) 3123-21 IN WP 1164-12.odt
which reads thus :-
"70. As a result of the above discussion, the
Writ Petition succeeds. We direct the Mumbai
Port Trust -respondent No. 1 to abide by the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of M. Nagraj and particularly the
conclusions reproduced in the forgoing
paragraphs and give effect to it as expeditiously
as possible. In giving effect to it, it shall ignore
any contrary provisions or stipulations in the
OM dated 21st January, 2002. It must ignore all
clarifcations post M. Nagraj, including the one
contained in the letter dated 18 th September,
2007, give effect to and implement this
judgment. We direct that all consequential
steps be taken within a period of four months
from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment. We clarify that individual matters
are not before us. Therefore, if there are powers
available to revisit any promotions or matters
concerning seniority under the Service
Rules/Regulations, then, by abiding with the
same, appropriate steps be taken by the MPT.
Needless to clarify that before any adverse
orders are passed, the concerned employees
shall be given a fair and reasonable opportunity
of being heard. No orders, including taking
away any promotions, seniority or reversion
shall be passed without complying with the
principles of natural justice. Rules made
absolute in the above terms. The parties are left
to bear their own costs.
71. Needless further to clarify that the
Department of Personnel & Training and the
Department of Shipping (Port Wings) in the
Ministry of Shipping & Surface Transport,
Government of India, shall not in any manner
interfere with the implementation of this
Nikita Gadgil
2/5
::: Uploaded on - 03/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2021 00:33:00 :::
26. CONPW(L) 3123-21 IN WP 1164-12.odt
judgment by the Mumbai Port Trust. Any
contrary directions from these Ministries so as
not to allow the Mumbai Port Trust to
implement and abide by this judgment would be
visited with severe consequences. Needless also
to further clarify that this judgment equally
binds the Central Government and the above
Ministries."
4. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that in
compliance of the order passed by this Court, the
respondent issued a promotion list dated 18th November
2020, promoting the reserved category persons. Hence, he
has fled the present petition.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that
the respondents are going to issue a further promotion list
in defance of the order passed by this Court. Therefore,
they may be restrained from issuing any further list of
promotion without complying the order passed by this Court
in Writ Petition No. 1164 of 2020. In support of its
contention, learned advocate for petitioner relyed on
paragraph 13 of its petition, which reads thus:-
"13. The Petitioners understand that the
Respondents have now prepared further
promotion lists and are likely to release them by
promoting reserved category employees of their
Departments in violation of the judgment dated
30.11.2016/1.12.2016. It is therefore necessary
to restrain the Respondents from fling up any
promotional posts by promoting reserved
category employees in violation of the orders of
this Hon'ble Court dated 30.11.2016/1.12.2016"
Nikita Gadgil
3/5
::: Uploaded on - 03/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2021 00:33:00 :::
26. CONPW(L) 3123-21 IN WP 1164-12.odt
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondents submits on instructions that he required two
weeks time to fle reply. He further made a statement that
he has received instructions from his clients that they have
already complied the order passed by this Court in Writ
Petition No. 1164/20. Therefore, there is no question of
granting any relief in favour of petitioner in terms of prayer
clause (c) of present Contempt Petition.
7. Heard both the sides. It is to be noted that in the
present proceedings, this Court has directed the
respondents to comply the order passed by the Apex Court
in the matter of M. Nagraj and Ors Vs. Union of India and
Ors. (2006) 8 SCC 212. Whether the respondents have
complied the said order or not that can be considered after
reply fled by them.
8. In the meanwhile, if the respondents again promotes
the persons without following the orders passed by this
Court, then injustice will cause on the petitioner. In view of
this fact, following order is passed:-
ORDER
1. The respondent to fle their affdavit-in-reply, on or
before 12th March 2021, with copy to other side.
2. Rejoinder, if any, be fled on or before 19th March 2021,
with copy to other side.
3. Till next date, ad-interim relief is granted in terms of
the prayer clause (c), which reads thus:-
"(c) that pending the hearing and fnal disposal
of this petition the Respondents be restrained
Nikita Gadgil
26. CONPW(L) 3123-21 IN WP 1164-12.odt
from issuing any further promotions orders for
reserved category employees in violation of the
judgment dated 30.11.2016 / 1.12.2016 on Writ
Petition No. 1164 of 2012".
9. Matter to appear on board on 31st March 2021.
(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.) (K.K.TATED, J.)
Nikita Gadgil
