Bombay High Court
The M.D, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh ... vs Industrial Court, Amravati And 2 ... on 6 October, 2021
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
14.wp.2894.2018 Judg..odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.2894/2018
The Managing Director,
Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Urban Co-operative
Bank Ltd., Through its Managing Director
Shri Narendra Bhim Puri, Age - Adult,
Irwin Chowk, Amravati,
Tq. And Dist. Amravati. ..... PETITIONER
(Ori. Respondent)
// VERSUS //
1. Member, Industrial Court, Amravati,
Camp Amravati.
2. Judge Labour Court, Amravati,
Camp Amravati.
3. Ashok Digambarrao Kale
Aged about 59 years, Occ. Nil,
R/o Durga Colony, Morshi,
Taluka - Morshi, Dist. Amravati. .... RESPONDENTS
(Ori. Complainant)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. V. B. Bhise, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. S. A. Ashirgade, Additional Government Pleader for
respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. N. R. Saboo, Advocate for respondent No.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATED : 06/10/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1] Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
14.wp.2894.2018 Judg..odt
2] Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing
for the rival parties.
3] The petitioner Bank has deposited an amount of
Rs.29,77,150/- (Rs. Twenty Nine Lakhs Seventy Seven Thousand One
Hundred Fifty) on account of back-wages and interest thereupon, as
directed by the learned Labour Court in its Judgment dated 27.07.2015,
in Complaint (ULP) No.190/1999. Out of this amount, 50 % amount
has been permitted to be withdrawn by the respondent No.3, by order
dated 15.03.2019.
4] Mr. Bhise, learned counsel for the petitioner Bank submits
that the petitioner Bank has claimed on account of loan advanced to the
respondent No.3, which is as on 5.10.2021 to the tune of Rs.3,63,200/-,
(Rs. Three Lakh Sixty Three Thousand Two Hundred) and in case, the
same is deducted from the amount deposited in this Court and made
over to the petitioner bank, it would give up the challenge in the
petition.
5] Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for the respondent No.3, though
disputes the correctness of the figure of outstanding amount on account
of loan, as claimed by the petitioner Bank, however, he is agreeable to
deduct this amount from the amount deposited in this Court, subject to
14.wp.2894.2018 Judg..odt
any dispute regarding the correctness of the figure claimed by the bank
being kept open.
6] In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to
withdraw an amount of Rs.3,63,200/-, (Rs. Three Lakh Sixty Three
Thousand Two Hundred) out of the balance amount as presently
deposited in this Court. The rest of the amount with accrued interest be
paid to the respondent No.3.
7] It is made clear that any dispute regarding the correctness of
the amount claimed by the Bank, is kept open.
8] The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the consent
of the parties.
9] Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J)
Sarkate.
