Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nashik Mahanagar Palika Shramik ... vs Nashik Municipal Corporation ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1197 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1197 Bom
Judgement Date : 2 February, 2022

Bombay High Court
Nashik Mahanagar Palika Shramik ... vs Nashik Municipal Corporation ... on 2 February, 2022
Bench: Virendrasingh Gyansingh Bisht
                                                 14-WP-8730-2021

Pdp


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                  WRIT PETITION NO. 8730 OF 2021

      Nashik Mahanagar Palika Shramik
      Sangh                                           ..Petitioner
               Vs.
      Nashik Municipal Corporation & Ors.             ..Respondents

      Mr. Bhavesh Parmar a/w Mr. Vivekanand Akshali a/w Ms.
      Reshma Nair i/by Mr. Devmani Shukla for petitioner.
      Mr. M. L. Patil for respondent no.1.
      Mr. M. M. Pable, AGP for State.
      Mr. Sandeep Marne - Intervener (WP/5055/2016).

                         C0RAM: DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ &
                                V. G. BISHT, J.

DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2022

PC:

1. Nashik Municipal Corporation has issued Detailed E- Tender Notice No.01/02-2021-2022 inviting bids from registered/experienced contractors in respect of the following work: -

"Daily Municipal Solid Waste Collection from Nashik West division and Transportation to Compost Plant at Pathardi for five years from the date of work order."

2. The said E-Tender notice is under challenge in this writ petition on the ground that registration obtained by the Corporation under section 7 of the Contract Labour

14-WP-8730-2021

(Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereafter "the said Act", for short) has since been cancelled by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour and Registering & Licensing Officer under the said Act under section 8 thereof and, therefore, the Corporation acted beyond its jurisdiction in seeking to employ a contractor for the purpose of the aforesaid work.

3. On the previous occasion, i.e., 1st February, 2022 we had recorded the submission of Mr. Marne, learned advocate, who had intervened and assured to place before us the judgment of the appellate authority under section 15 of the said Act while disposing of an appeal by the Corporation against the order of revocation of registration passed under section 8 thereof.

4. The appellate order dated 21st March, 2016 records in its operative part as follows: -

": O R D E R :

The order of the Respondent dated 01.01.2016 is stayed and set-aside subject to the following conditions. If the following conditions are not met and fulfilled by the Appellant, the order of the Respondent will remain in force and appeal shall be treated as rejected.

           A.      The Appellant shall implement the rates of the
                   Minimum           Wages     prescribed       by   the

Government of Maharashtra vide notification dtd. 24.02.2015 to all the contract labours

14-WP-8730-2021

including Ghantagadi/safai workers with in a period of fort night.

B. The Appellant shall communicate to the Respondent regarding its intention to absorb the Ghantagadi workers in a phased manner i.e. within seven years of time limit on pro rata basis.

C. Once this letter from Appellant Corporation is received, the Respondent with the help of Appellant's officers shall work out the time frame policy, to identify and finalise the seniority list of Ghantagadi workers in three months time and publish the seniority list of the required workers to be absorbed by the Appellant.

D. The first phase of the identified workers shall be absorbed in the permanent employment of the Appellant within one years time from the date of passing of this order."

5. Mr. Parmar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the conditions, subject to fulfillment whereof the order of the appellate authority would remain enforceable, have not been complied with by the Corporation; and, therefore, it is the order of the registering authority dated 1 st January, 2016 that is subsisting now.

6. Mr. Pable, learned AGP appears for the respondent no.2. Due to want of instructions, Mr. Pable is not in a position to apprise us as to whether conditions A to D in the aforesaid

14-WP-8730-2021

excerpt of the appellate order have been complied with by the Corporation or not.

7. We call upon the respondent no.2 to file a short affidavit indicating therein as to whether after the order dated 21st March, 2016 of the appellate authority, the Corporation has complied with the said four conditions (A to D) and also as to whether the registration granted under section 7 of the said Act in favour of the Corporation is being treated to be valid and subsisting for all purposes.

8. Let such affidavit be filed by Tuesday next (8th February, 2022). List this writ petition on Wednesday next (9th February, 2022).

                           (V. G. BISHT, J.)                    (CHIEF JUSTICE)


PRAVIN
DASHARATH
PANDIT
Digitally signed by
PRAVIN DASHARATH
PANDIT
Date: 2022.02.03
10:58:54 +0530





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter