Disposed

Nashik Mahanagarpalika Kamgar Karmachari Sanghatana v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2007WP/7149/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A direction was issued to the Nasik Municipal Corporation and State Government to forward a proposal for regularisation of 18 employees within six weeks, with protection against termination pending government consideration. The associated labour court complaint was withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Municipal Corporation and State Government to forward regularisation proposal within 6 weeks; protection against termination.

Nashik Mahanagarpalika Kamgar Karmachari… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO. 7149 OF 2006

¶4

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of :
 coram, appearances, Court’s Orders: Court’s or Judge’s orders
 or directions and Registrar Orders:

¶5

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Mr.Bhavesh Parmar for the Petitioner.

¶6

 Mr.S.R. Nargolkar, A.G.P. for
 Respondent No.1.

¶7

 Mr.J. Shekhar for Respondent No.2.

¶8

 CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE, ACG. CJ. &
 V.M. KANADE, J.
 DATE : 6TH FEBRUARY 2007
P.C. :
 1. Heard the counsel for the

¶9

 parties.

¶10

 2. The case of the Petitioner is
 that 18 employees, whose names are
 listed in Exhibit-A to the petition, are
 situated similarly to some 53 other
 employees. They all figure in one
 common list and that list was approved
 by the General Body Resolution of the
 Nasik Municipal Corporation dated 10th
 October 2001 for the purpose of
 regularisation. It has so happened that
 53 out of that list had filed one
 proceeding earlier and they were
 directed to be regularised. Mr.Shekhar

¶11

 - 2 -

¶12

 appearing for Respondent No.2 Municipal
 Corporation states that since the 18
 employees mentioned in Exhibit-A to the
 petition are situated similarly to those
 other 53 employees, the Municipal
 Corporation will consider them for
 regularisation. That will however be
 after completion of certain formalities
 such as preparing the proposal and
 forwarding it to the State Government.

¶13

 3. In view of the above, the
 Municipal Corporation is directed to
 forward the proposal of these 18
 employees for regularisation to the

¶14

 State Government within 6 weeks from
 today and the State Government will take
 further appropriate decision within 6
 weeks thereafter. The services of these
 18 employees will not be terminated
 until the proposal is considered by the
 Government.

¶15

 4. We record the statement of

¶16

 Mr.Parmar that the Complaint (ULP)
 No.159 of 2002 filed in the Labour Court

¶17

 at Nasik will be withdrawn by the
 Petitioner. Mr.Parmar will see to it

¶18

 - 3 -

¶19

 that a certified copy of the order to be

¶20

 passed by the Labour Court, Nasik

¶21

 recording withdrawal of the complaint
 will be forwarded to the Nasik Municipal
 Corporation within 2 weeks from the date

¶22

 of passing of that order.

¶23

 5. Petition stands disposed of with

¶24

 the above order.

¶25

 ACG. CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

 V.M. KANADE, J.

Nashik Mahanagarpalika Kamgar Karmachari Sanghatana v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nashik Mahanagarpalika Kamgar Karmachari Sanghatana v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Kanhyalal Ghanshyamdas Nathani Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Harishchandra Rajaram Sutar Vs the Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Maharashtra Rajya Suraksha Rakshak and General Kamgar Union Vs the Security Gurads Board for Greater Bombay and Ors.

Rohini Ravikant Acharekar Vs the Returning Officer and Ors.

Sadiya Rafat Abdul Kayyum Bagalkore Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mangal Deepak Chavan - Shete Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.