The Zonal Manager, Uco Bank, ... vs Shrawan Mahadeorao Nikhar And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3758 Bom

                                                      1                       1.CAO.231-22 IN MCA ST .7062-20.odt




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

                   CIVIL APPLICATION (CAO) NO. 231 OF 2022
                                      IN
                 MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION ST. NO. 7062 OF 2020
                        ( The Zonal Manager, Uco Bank, Nagpur.
                                         Vs.
                          Shrawan Mahadeorao Nikhar & Anr. )

Office Notes, Office Memoranda                            Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders     or    directions and
Registrar's orders


                                  Mr. S.A. Marathe, Advocate for the Applicant/Petitioner.



                                  CORAM:        AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 6th APRIL, 2022.

Heard Mr. Marathe, learned counsel for the applicant.

2. The application seeks a review of the order dated 25/27.02.2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 4857/2014, on the ground, that the applicant was entitled to 50% back-wages, which was the relief which was granted by the learned C.G.I.T. Nagpur, in the award dated 01.04.2014. The said judgment was challenged before this Court and while admitting the matter on 27.03.2015, the direction regarding 50% back-wages were stayed on the condition to deposit the said amount in this Court. The review petitioner has already been reinstated on 01.04.2014. During the course of arguments, when the mater was finally heard, 2 1.CAO.231-22 IN MCA ST .7062-20.odt

considering the fact that the review petitioner was likely to retire in August 2022 i.e within a period of 7 months, in order to give a hiatus to the matter, in view of the fact, that the initial termination was of the year 2004 and reinstatement was effected since prior to 01.07.2016, for which duration, the review petitioner had not performed any work, the petition was partly allowed and the order of reinstatement was maintained and the order granting 50% back-wages was set-aside.

3. The contention relying upon the Deepali Gundu Surwase Vs Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D.Ed) and others, (2013) 10 SCC 324, that the applicant was entitled to 50% of back-wages, in my considered opinion does not constitute a ground for review, as the judgment dated 25/27.02.2020, had already noted this position regarding grant of 50% back- wages, however in order to give hiatus to the matter, the order of reinstatement was maintained and the order of 50% back-wages was set aside. Even otherwise, Deepali Gundu Surwase (supra) has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs. Phool Chand (Dead) through Legal Representatives, (2018) 18 SCC 299 and so also in Allahabad Bank and others Vs. Krishan Pal Singh, Civil Appeal No. 5808/2021, decided on 20.09.2021 by the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein it has been held that reinstatement with full back-wages is not automatic in every case, where termination/dismissal is found to be not in accordance with prescribed 3 1.CAO.231-22 IN MCA ST .7062-20.odt

procedure, considering which, I do not find any ground to review the judgment dated 25/27.02.2020, on the basis of the above plea. The application is accordingly dismissed No costs.

JUDGE SD. Bhimte

Signed By:SHRIKANT DAMODHAR BHIMTE

Signing Date:07.04.2022 18:38