Bombay High Court
Rayat Shikshan Sanstha Satara Thr. Its ... vs Bhimrao Bhaghoji Devkule on 30 January, 2024
Author: Sandeep V. Marne
Bench: Sandeep V. Marne
2024:BHC-AS:4929
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 1/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.16503 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
GANESH BHANUDAS BODHE ....RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.16511 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
VINAYAK SURYAKANT GHOLAP ....RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.16512 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
TANAJI DATTU YADAV ....RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.16553 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
BHARAT VITTHAL JADHAV ....RESPONDENT
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.16557 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
BHIMRAO BHAGHOJI DEVKULE ....RESPONDENT
katkam 1/7
::: Uploaded on - 01/02/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 21/02/2024 19:12:22 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 2/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.16559 OF 2023
RAYAT SHIKSHAN SANSTHA & ORS. ....PETITIONERS
V/S
SANJAY SHAMRAO NANGARE ....RESPONDENT
...
Mr. Kiran Bapat a/w Mr. Prasanna Shahane i/b Mr. Milind Deshmukh for
the Petitioners.
Mr. Pramod Kathane a/w Mr. Manoj G. Sawardekar for Respondent/s.
...
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATE : JANUARY 30, 2024.
P.C.:
1 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned
Counsel appearing for the parties, these Writ Petitions are taken for final
hearing and disposal.
2 Petitioner- Rayat Shikshan Sanstha, Satara has filed these Petitions
challenging orders dated 19 July 2023, 20 July 2023 and 21 July 2023
passed by the Industrial Court, Satara allowing applications filed by
Respondents at Exhibit U-2 and granting interim relief in their favour by
directing the Petitioners to deposit in the Industrial Court the unpaid
amount of dearness allowance, difference between the salary actually
paid and salary payable as per the 7 th Pay Commission recommendations
with effect from 1 January 2016. The Industrial Court has further
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 3/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
directed the Petitioners to deposit in the Industrial Court difference of
amount of Provident Fund contribution between the amount which is
already deposited and the amount which was being deposited prior to
December 2019 with the Provident Fund Authorities.
3 Respondents are working with Petitioner-Educational Institution
on various posts and have filed various Complaints before the Industrial
Court, Satara under provisions of section 28 of the Maharashtra
Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention Unfair Labour Practices Act,
1971 (MRTP & PULP Act). Their grievance in the Complaints is about
non-payment of dearness allowance in accordance with various
notifications issued by the Government of Maharashtra since July 2015.
The second grievance of the Respondents is about failure on the part of
the Petitioners to extend the benefits of 7 th Pay Commission with effect
from 1 January 2016. The third grievance of the Respondents is about
failure on the part of the Petitioners to deposit the Provident Fund
contribution @ 12% of basic pay plus grade pay plus dearness allowance
after January 2020 onwards.
4 With the above three grievances, Respondents have invoked the
jurisdiction of the Industrial Court. In their Complaints, Respondents
filed applications at Exhibit U-2 seeking interim relief for deposit of
amounts arising out of arrears of dearness allowance as well as arrears
of 7th Pay Commission and difference in Provident Fund contribution in
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 4/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
the Industrial Court during pendency of the Complaints. Petitioners have
filed Reply to the applications at Exhibit U-2 taking defence inter alia that
the 7th Pay Commission recommendations are not applicable to the
Petitioner-Institution. Petitioners have also raised the defence of
limitation while opposing the claim of the Respondents. The Industrial
Court has proceeded to pass interim orders by allowing the applications
at Exhibit U-2 by orders dated 19 July 2023, 20 July 2023 and 21 July
2023 directing Petitioners to deposit in the Industrial Court amounts
towards arrears of dearness allowance, 7th Pay Commission difference as
well as provident fund contribution.
5 I have heard Mr. Bapat, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the Petitioners and Mr. Katne, the learned Counsel appearing for the
Respondents.
6 After having considered the submissions canvassed by the learned
Counsel appearing for the parties, it is seen that the main issue involved
in the Complaints filed by the Respondents is about applicability of
various notifications issued by the Government of Maharashtra effecting
increase in the dearness allowance from time to time. It is Respondents'
grievance that though dearness allowance has been revised by the
Government of Maharashtra from time to time from July 2015, the
Respondents' have not applied such hike in the dearness allowance while
paying the salaries to the Respondents. Similarly it is Respondents'
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 5/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
grievance that though 7th Pay Commission recommendations are made
effective from 1 January 2016, Petitioners are not paying salaries to the
Respondents in accordance with the 7th Pay Commission scales. On the
contrary it is the case of the Petitioners that neither notifications issued
by the Government of Maharashtra effecting increase in dearness
allowances nor recommendations of 7th Pay Commission are
automatically applicable to the Petitioner-Institution. It is possibly the
case of the Petitioner-Institution that unless it voluntarily adopts various
notifications issued by the Government of Maharashtra and that unless it
makes applicable the recommendations of the particular Pay
Commission, it cannot be forced to pay to its employees salaries in
accordance with any notifications issued by the Government of
Maharashtra or recommendations made by any Pay Commission.
7 In my view there is thus clear contest between the parties about
entitlement of the employees to receive dearness allowance as notified
by the Government of Maharashtra for time to time and also to receive
salaries as per the 7th Pay Commission scale. Unless this contest is
decided, the Industrial Court cannot direct that the amounts arising out
of arrears of dearness allowance and difference of 7th Pay Commission
scales must be deposited in the Court by way of interim order.
8 Also of relevance is the fact that the prayer made by the
Respondents for payment of difference of dearness allowance from July
2015 as well as payment of difference of salaries as per the 7 th Pay
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 6/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
Commission scale from 1 January 2016 will have to be considered in the
light of limitation provided for under the MRTU and PULP Act. Though
receipt of less salary may give rise to recurring cause of action, limitation
would apply qua arrears. This is the law expounded by the Apex Court in
its judgment in Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh. (2008) 8 SCC 648. The
Industrial Court will have to apply its mind to the aspect of limitation as
well while deciding the entitlement of Respondents to receive arrears
from July 2015 or January 2016, even if it comes to a conclusion that the
Petitioner-Institution is bound to apply notifications of Government of
Maharashtra and recommendations of Pay Commission to its employees.
9 In my view the nature of prayers made in the Interim Application
filed by the Respondents are such that the same could be considered only
at the time of final hearing of the Complaints. In that view of the matter,
the orders passed by the Industrial Court are clearly unsustainable. In
the event the Respondents succeed in their Complaints, they will receive
arrears of dearness allowance, salary and Provident Fund contribution.
However to expect the Petitioners to deposit the amount of arrears of
dearness allowance, difference of 7th Pay Commission scale and
difference of Provident Fund contribution at an interim stage is clearly
speculative. I, therefore, find the order dated 19 July 2023 passed by the
Industrial Court to be totally unsustainable.
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 12/02/2024
k 7/7 42 wp 16503.23 group as.doc
10 The Writ Petitions accordingly succeed. The orders dated 19 July
2023, 20 July 2023 and 21 July 2023 passed by the Industrial Court,
Satara are set aside. The Industrial Court is requested to expedite the
hearing of Complaints filed by Respondents. Mr. Bapat fairly makes a
statement that the Written Statements to the Complaints would be filed
within a period of four weeks from today. The Industrial Court shall make
an endevour to decide Complaints as expeditiously as possible preferably
within a period of one year from today.
11 With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are allowed. Rule is
made absolute.
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)
