Sharad Mahadevsa Chikar vs Registrar, Punjabrao Deshmukh ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 295 Bom

                                                                                                          (1)                                                  3wp2.23

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

                                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 2 OF 2023
 Sharad Mashadevsa Chikar_ Vs. _Registrar, Punjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                     Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Mr. I.A.Fidvi, Advocate for petitioner.



                                                                           CORAM :                     AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 09/01/2023

Heard Mr. I.A.Fidvi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petition challenges the order dated 18.10.2022 whereby the complaint filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on ground that the claim for permanency as invoked earlier in ULP No. 296/1987 and 300/1987, has been set aside by the High Court by the order/judgment dated 8.11.2006 (pg.34) with a direction that the petitioner (respondent herein) shall maintain the names of the respective respondents therein on their list for grant of permanency and as and when the vacancy arises, shall consider them at relevant time in accordance therewith.

Though a contention is raised that consequent to the judgment of this court, the petitioner has been continued in employment for a period of 12 years, the complaint before the learned Industrial Court does not disclose this position, rather on the contrary, para 2 of the complaint indicates that the cause of action (2) 3wp2.23

to claim permanency has arisen on 31.12.1979, which was a case which was already considered by this Court in the judgment dated 8.11.2006 in WP Nos.762/1996 and 912/96 and therefore, is a plea which has been turned down, on which count the impugned judgment cannot be questioned.

The contention however is that consequent to the judgment of this court dated 8.11.2006, since 2010 the petitioner has been continued in employment for further period of 8 years, which plea, it is contended has not been considered. To demonstrate this Mr. Fidvi learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to place the evidence laid before the Industrial Court on record with supporting documents, considering which list the matter on 16.1.2023.

JUDGE Rvjalit

Digitally sign byRAJESH VASANTRAO JALIT Location:

Signing Date:12.01.2023 12:54