Kolsa Khadan Sahakari Sanstha ... vs Suhas S/O Marotrao Gujar And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1703 Bom

                                                            1                                21-WP-1101-23.odt


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

                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 1101/2023

Kolsa Khadan Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Vs. Suhas s/o Marotrao Gujar & Anr.

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

                                  Mr. P.D. Meghe, Advocate for petitioner


                                  CORAM:        AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 20th FEBRUARY, 2023

The only grievance raised by the petitioner is that without there being a prayer in the complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (M.R.T.U. & P.U.L.P. Act), claiming subsistence allowance, the learned Industrial Court in the impugned judgment dated 20/09/2019 has granted the same along with interest (page 29). There is no dispute between the parties as to the relationship; the factum of suspension; the duration of suspension and the fact that the rules permits grant of subsistence allowance. The complaint in para 6, raises a grievance, that the respondent was not paid subsistence allowance. The learned Industrial Court, has rendered a categorical finding in para 26 that considering the nature of evidence which has been brought on record, the respondent was entitled for subsistence allowance as per the prescribed rates for the duration as mentioned therein. Prayer clause (d) in the 2 21-WP-1101-23.odt

complaint (page 35), is wide enough for the learned Industrial Court to entertain a plea for subsistence allowance, moreso, when the parties have gone to trial with that position. The plea regarding payment of interest, on the ground, that earlier the matter was dismissed in default and thereafter was restored also cannot be entertained as that is one of the vagaries of the delay in the decision of matters for which no blame can be blamed for either of the parties, considering which I do not see any reason to interfere in the impugned order. The petition is therefore, dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE

MP Deshpande

Digitally signed by:MILIND P DESHPANDE Signing Date:21.02.2023 10:24