Dismissed

Lilharam Jagat Lilhare and6 Others v. Ujawal Ispaat Pvt.Ltd. and Another

Bombay HC1 Mar 2018WP/2503/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners, formerly registered Mathadi Labour, sought work after their criminal acquittal. The Court, in the absence of petitioners and respondents, directed them to verify their current registration status with the Board and demand work based on that status, discharging the rule.

What did the court decide?

Rule discharged, no costs, petitioners given liberty to verify registration status and demand work accordingly.

Lilharam Jagat Lilhare and6 Others Vs Ujawal Ispaat… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1.3WP.2503.02

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2503 OF 2002.

¶5

(Lilharam s/o Jagat Lilhare (Mukadam) & others .vs. Ujawal Ispaat Pvt. Ltd. & another)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & A.D. UPADHYE, JJ. DATED : MARCH 1, 2018.

¶8

1] Matter was called out on 16.11.2017 and was adjourned to give opportunity to petitioners. It was then called out on 20.2.2018 and came to be adjourned for today.

¶9

2] Today, there is no appearance for any of the petitioners. 3] Notice sent to petitioner no.6 for engagement of other Advocate is not served as he is not available at the address supplied. 4] The Counsel for respondent no.2 Mathadi Board is also not present.

¶10

5] Mr. S. Ghate, learned Counsel for respondent no.1, is also seeking time to place on record an affidavit to demonstrate that respondent no.1 has no work for Mathadi labour since long.

¶11

6] Controversy is about providing work to petitioners by respondent no.2 Board. Petitioners were earlier registered as Mathadi Labour and respondent no.2 Board had sent them to respondent no.1. The respondent no.1 found that there was serious dereliction and breach of discipline at the hands of petitioners. That incident also led to criminal prosecution of petitioners.

¶12

7] Because of this incident and misconduct, respondent no.2

¶13

1.3WP.2503.02

¶14

¶15

did not forward petitioners to respondent no.1.

¶16

8] Petitioners now claim that they are acquitted by Criminal Court and hence, their work should be restored. Pleadings do not show that after their acquittal they have reported back either to respondent no.1 or to respondent no.2. Mere acquittal in this situation may or may not entitle them to reinstatement or then to allotment only with respondent no.1.

¶17

9] In this situation, it is open to petitioners to find out whether they still continue to be registered as Mathadi Labour with respondent no.2 and to demand work accordingly or then to obtain registration as Mathadi labour as per law. Thus, with this liberty and if they are registered, thereafter to demand work, we dispose of present Writ Petition. Rule discharged. No costs.

¶18

Judge

¶19

Judge

¶20

Lilharam Jagat Lilhare and6 Others v. Ujawal Ispaat Pvt.Ltd. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lilharam Jagat Lilhare and6 Others v. Ujawal Ispaat Pvt.Ltd. and Another

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

Maharshtra Veej Grahak Sanghatana, through Its Authorised Signatory, Shri Suhas Raghunath Khandekar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Energy, Mumbai and Another

Nagari Nakka Saurakshan Manch through Central President Shri. Janardan Gulabrao Moon Vs Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi and Others

Nature Conservation Society Thr Kd Rithe Vs State of Maha Thr Chief Sec and 28 Ors.

M/S Keshavam Food Park, through Its Proprietor, Shri Ramkrishna S/O Govind Poddar Vs the Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Food Processing Industiries, New Delhi and 2

Maha. Rajya Paddawidhar Prathmik Shikshak Mahasangh/Maha Rajya Graduate Pri. Teacher Ass. Thr. Pres Vs Zilla Parishad, Bhandara, through Its Chief Executive Officer, Bhandara and Another

Sunil S/O Gayaprasad Mishra Vs the Chancellor Rashatrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University