Partly allowed

Divisional Controller, Msrtc, Ratnagiri Division v. Yogesh G. Patwardhan

Bombay HC22 Feb 2024WP/3183/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court modified an impugned Labour Court order awarding wage difference. Interest of 15% from the application date was quashed as unsupported by reasons. The main award and direction for 3% annual increment were affirmed.

What did the court decide?

Interest of 15% from date of application was set aside. Petitioner directed to pay 3% annual increment and remuneration for additional work within eight weeks.

Divisional Controller, Msrtc, Ratnagiri… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

48-wp-3183-2022.doc

¶2

Shabnoor

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

SHABNOOR AYUB PATHAN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.3183 OF 2022

¶6

Digitally signed bySHABNOOR AYUBPATHAN Date: 2024.02.2218:13:13 +0530

¶7

Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Ratnagiri Division … Petitioner

¶8

V/s.

¶9

Yogesh G. Patwardhan … Respondent

¶10

Mr. Yashodeep P. Deshmukh a/w Ms. Vaidehi Pradeep, for Petitioner.

¶11

Mr. G. M. Joshi, for Respondent.

¶12

CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.

¶13

DATED : FEBRUARY 22, 2024

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

The writ petition challenges an order passed by the Labour Court, Ratnagiri directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.26,946/- alongwith interest @ 15% and 3% annual salary increment. According to the petitioner, the respondent was not entitled to the relief granted.

¶16

On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that, the Labour Court based on circulars issued by the petitioner held that the respondent to be entitled to the difference of wages from 1^st April 2010 till 31^st March 2012. However, the reasons assigned in the judgment do not supports for grant of interest of 15%.

¶17

¶18

48-wp-3183-2022.doc

¶19

Therefore, the order of grant of interest @ 15% from the date of filing of the application till its recovery needs to be set aside. Hence, following order:

¶20

i) The impugned order dated 7^th December 2019 is modified to the extent that the directions against the petitioner directing payment of interest @ 15% from the date of application is quashed and set aside. Rest of the award shall remain.

¶21

ii) The respondent is entitled to withdraw an amount of Rs.26,946/- alongwith interest accrued, if any.

¶22

iii) Needless to state that the petitioner shall pay annual 3% salary increment and remuneration for additional work as directed in clause (2) of the impugned order within eight weeks from today.

¶23

With this clarification, the writ petition stands disposed of in above terms. No costs.

¶24

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

¶25

Divisional Controller, Msrtc, Ratnagiri Division v. Yogesh G. Patwardhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Controller, Msrtc, Ratnagiri Division v. Yogesh G. Patwardhan

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

Hiren Chs Ltd. Vs Prasana Park Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. and Ors.

S.D. Corporation Private Limited Vs the Additional District Deputy Collector, and Ors.

Mahadev Satappa Javir (Mochi) Vs Natraj Basaweshwar Narole and Anr.

Union of India through the General Manager Western Railway vs Deputy Director General of Forests

Maharashtra Maritime Board a Statutory Board Constituted Under Maharashtra Maritime Board ACT,1996 vs Union of India

Laxmi Sahakari Sheti Pani Puravtha Sanstha Maryadit. through Its Chairman Vs Shri. Jalindar Ananda Patil