Bombay High Court
Nutan Vidarbha Shikshan Mandal, ... vs State Of Maharahtra, Through Its ... on 19 March, 2021
Bench: S.B. Shukre, Avinash G. Gharote
4wp 1779.2020.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Writ Petition No. 1779/2020
Nutan Vidarbha Shikshan Mandal
..VS..
State of Maharashtra and ors.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order__________________________________________________________
Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the petitioner
Shri A.S. Fulzele, AGP for respondent nos. 1 and 2/ State
CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.
DATED : 19/03/2021
We have heard this matter for sometime. We
are of the opinion that the common judgment, which is
subject of the challenge delivered by the learned Single
Judge of this Court on 10.10.2019 in bunch of writ
petitions starting from Writ Petition No. 5108/2013 are
required to be gone through.
2. We would request the learned Counsel for the
petitioner to place all those judgments impugned in this
bunch of writ petitions before this Court.
3. The respondents have not filed any reply in
the matter, which indicates that as of now the respondents
do not wish to contest this petition.
SMGate
4wp 1779.2020.odt
4. Shri A.S. Fulzele, the learned AGP makes a
request for grant of further time to file reply.
5. By way of last chance, two weeks time is
granted to respondent nos. 1 and 2 to file reply, failing
which it shall be presumed by this Court that the
respondents admit all the averment made in the petition
and also has no objection to grant the prayers made in this
petition and accordingly, we shall proceed to pass
appropriate orders in matter including the one which may
fix accountability in the matter.
6. Stand over two weeks.
Civil Application (CAW) 1240/2020
Heard.
2. This application for intervention has been
filed by the applicants, namely, Ku. Kavita Ramkrishna
Khairkar and Ambadas Sitaram Satange, on the ground
that as per the common judgment dated 10.10.2019
delivered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in
afore-stated bunch of writ petitions, these applicants are
found to be entitled to receive the back-wages.
3. The issue involved in this petition is entirely
different and it relates to the right of management to seek
salary grant so as to satisfy its liability as regards payment
of back-wages. Therefore, this application cannot be
allowed and if applicants have any grievance regarding
SMGate
4wp 1779.2020.odt
non-payment of back-wages, the applicants are at liberty
to pursue such remedy as may be available in law.
4. Accordingly, the application is rejected.
JUDGE JUDGE
SMGate
