In a writ petition and connected civil application regarding salary dispute, the court held that the petitioner's claim fails as his absence was rejected by the Medical Board. The petition was disposed of as infructuous with rule discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 WP3901.2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3901 OF 2000
Gorakhnath s/o Gangaram Pardeshi
...Petitioner..
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others
...Respondents.
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10332 OF 2006
Mr V. M. Mane, Advocate for petitioner Mr P. P. More, AGP for respondent/State
CORAM : A. V. NIRGUDE & A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 15TH , 2014.
PER COURT :
petitioner/applicant submits that, his client's demands are mostly fulfilled by the respondent-employer. He further submits that, his client was not paid salary for the period during which he remained absent. He tried to suggest that, the period of absence can be considered as sick leave. The petitioner had 600 days sick leave to his account and the same can be utilized.
2 WP3901.2000
that period of absence, his claim was rejected by the Medical Board.
(A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.)
(A. V. NIRGUDE, J.)
sgp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's claim for non-payment of salary during absence could succeed when his claim was rejected by the Medical Board.
Gorakhnath s/o Gangaram Pardeshi
The State of Maharashtra
A. V. NIRGUDE
A.I.S. CHEEMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
