Dismissed

Vijay Shankar Patil and Ors. v. the Divisional Manager, Uco Bank and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jun 2014WP/8402/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a Writ Petition is not an appropriate remedy to enforce Awards of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The Court declined to entertain the writ, directing the petitioners to initiate appropriate proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was not entertained; petitioners directed to initiate proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for enforcement.

Vijay Shankar Patil and Ors. Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

skc

¶2

ORDER-WP-8402-12

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 8402 OF 2012

¶5

Vijay Shankar Patil ] 2. Dilip S. Kotharkar ] .. Petitioners versus 1. The Divisional Manager, ] UCO Bank Division Office ] 2. UCO Bank Employee Union ] ..Respondents

¶6

Mr. Ashok T. Gade for Petitioners. Ms. Rita Joshi with Mr. A. D. Shetty for Respondents.

¶7

CORAM : A. S. OKA & M. S. SONAK, JJ.

¶8

Date of Reserving the Order: 08.05.2014 Date of Pronouncing the Order : 10.06.2014

¶9

ORDER ( Per : M. S. SONAK, J.) :-

¶10

1] By this petition, the Petitioners, in effect seek the implementation of Award dated 16.09.1999 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II in Reference No. CGIT-2/13 of 1999, which directs reinstatement of the Petitioners with back wages.

¶11

2] This Petition was taken up for consideration along with

1/3

skc

ORDER-WP-8402-12

Letters Patent Appeal No. 37 of 2013 by which the Respondent Bank had questioned the order dated 30.08.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4510 of 2000 upholding the aforesaid Award dated 16.09.1999.

¶16

3] By a separate judgment and order, we have declined to interfere with the order dated 30.08.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge. Thus, in effect the Award dated 16.09.2009 is upheld by this Court.

¶17

4] Despite the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that writ petition is not an appropriate remedy to enforce Awards that may be made by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. There are provisions available under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for the purposes of effective enforcement.

¶18

5] Accordingly, we decline to entertain this Writ Petition. However, we make it clear that the Petitioners shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 or under any other applicable law for the purpose of enforcement of the Award dated 16.09.1999.

2/3

skc

ORDER-WP-8402-12

6] With the aforesaid observations, the present Petition stands

¶23

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(M. S. SONAK, J.)

(A. S. OKA, J.)

Chandka

3/3

Vijay Shankar Patil and Ors. v. the Divisional Manager, Uco Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Shankar Patil and Ors. v. the Divisional Manager, Uco Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amar Prakash Dubal Vs the Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and Ors.

Shri. Vishnu Balu Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Suresh Shamrao Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Uco Bank Vs Uco Bank Employees Union and Ors.

Milind Anant Palse Vs Yojana Milind Palse

Vijay Shankar Patil and Anr. Vs Uco Bank Employees Union and Ors.