K. Obdelu, Warangal Dist. vs The Industrial Tribunal Cum ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 806 Tel

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                              AND
         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI


                         WRIT APPEAL No.900 of 2009

JUDGMENT:        (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)



       The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated 07.04.2009

passed in W.P.No.7209 of 2009.

       The facts of the case reveal that the writ petitioner preferred a

writ petition in the year 2009 being aggrieved by the award dated

10.06.2004

passed by the Industrial Tribunal and the learned Single

Judge keeping in view the judgments delivered in the case of State of

Madhya Pradesh vs. Bhailal Bhai1, Trilokchand and Motichand vs.

M.B. Munshi2, Rabindranath vs. Union of India3, Ashok Kumar

Mishra and another vs. Collector, Raipur and others4 and City and

Industrial Development Corporation vs. Dosu Aardeshir

Bhiwandiwala and others5 has dismissed the writ petition on the

ground of delay and laches.

The record of the case reveals that the writ petitioner has also

attained the age of superannuation and in the past also he was

punished for similar misconduct. He was put out of duty two times

AIR 1964 SC 1006

(1969) 1 SCC 110

AIR 1970 SC 470

AIR 1980 SC 112

(2009) 1 SCC 168

for remaining unauthorized absent. His annual increment was

deferred two times. He was earlier also inflicted with a punishment of

removal and was reinstated on account of the award passed in

I.D.No.471 of 1990. Even after his reinstatement on account of an

award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, again he was unauthorisedly

absent and in those circumstances, the punishment of removal was

inflicted upon him. As the writ petitioner has not approached the

High Court in time, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ

petition.

This Court, keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of

the case, does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed

by the learned Single Judge. However, it is made clear that in case

the writ petitioner is entitled for the monetary benefits even after

removal from service and in case they have not been settled, the same

be done positively within 90 days from today.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall

be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 21.02.2022 ES