Dismissed¶21

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept., Nashik v. Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Since Decd.) through Lrs.

Bombay HC27 Feb 2025CAW/9/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Executive Engineer Z.P. Nashik v. legal heirs of deceased workman Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate; Labour Court Nashik Award dated 28-05-2002 setting aside termination order dated 26-06-1980; backwages Rs.29,250 to legal representative; workman died 24-11-1993; writ petition admitted 28-06-2004, no interim relief; unfair labour practice complaint allowed 04-07-2015; Miscellaneous Criminal (ULP) No. 11 of 2017; Award complied with and backwages withdrawn; Article 227 jurisdiction declined; writ petition dismissed, Rule discharged, no order as to costs; Civil Application No. 9 of 2024 disposed.

What did the court decide?

The Court was not inclined to interfere in the impugned order (the Labour Court Award dated 28 May 2002), as it has already been complied with. ¶21

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should interfere with, or exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution to determine the correctness of, the impugned Labour Court Award dated 28 May 2002, which has already been complied with and whose backwages have been received by the legal heirs.

¶21

Court's answer

The Court was not inclined to interfere in the impugned order (the Labour Court Award dated 28 May 2002), as it has already been complied with.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Considering the quantum of backwages, coupled with the fact that the same have already been received by the legal heirs of the deceased employee, it would not be appropriate for this Court to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution to determine the correctness of the Award dated 28 May 2002 at this distant point of time.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 844 of 2004 (with Civil Application No. 9 of 2024), High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Sandeep V. Marne, J.), decided 27 February 2025 — The Executive Engineer, Z.P. Nashik challenged the Award dated 28 May 2002 of the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Nashik, which set aside the termination order dated 26 June 1980 and, the workman Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate having died on 24 November 1993 during the proceedings, granted the limited relief of backwages of Rs.29,250/- to his legal representative. The Petition was admitted on 28 June 2004 without interim relief. On the Award remaining unimplemented, the legal heirs prosecuted an unfair labour practice complaint allowed on 4 July 2015 directing implementation of the Award, and thereafter Miscellaneous Criminal (ULP) No. 11 of 2017, following which the Petitioner deposited the backwages, since withdrawn by the legal representative. Holding that the impugned order had already been complied with, and that, given the quantum of backwages already received by the legal heirs, it was not appropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution to determine the correctness of the Award dated 28 May 2002 at that distant point of time, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition, discharged the Rule and made no order as to costs; the Civil Application stood disposed of as nothing survived.

¶1

Sonali Mane

¶2

6-WP-844-2004.docx

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 844 OF 2004 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 844 OF 2004

¶5

The Executive Engineer,Z.P. Nashik

¶6

… Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Decd.) Thr. Lrs. Sour. Sindubai Bhagwat Gharate

¶9

… Respondent

¶10

Mr. Ashwinkumar R. Kapadnis for the Petitioner. Mr. Y.M. Pendse for the Respondent.

¶11

CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 27 FEBRUARY 2025.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

The Petition challenges Award dated 28 May 2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Nashik setting aside termination order dated 26 June 1980.

¶14

MANE SONALI DILIP

¶15

However it appears that during pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court the workman apparently passed away on 24 November 1993. Therefore the limited relief granted by the Labour Court was to pay backwages of Rs.29,250/- to the legal representative of the deceased worker. This Court admitted the present Petition by order dated 28 June 2004 and refused to grant any interim relief. Since the Award was not implemented the

¶16

Digitally signed byMANE SONALI DILIP Date: 2025.03.01 12:00:47 +0530

¶17

___Page No.1 of 2 ___ 27 February 2025

¶18

Sonali Mane

¶19

6-WP-844-2004.docx

¶20

legal heirs of the employee were required to file complaint of unfair labour practice, which came to be allowed on 4 July 2015 directing the Petitioner to implement the Award of the Labour Court. The legal heirs were thereafter required to file Miscellaneous Criminal (ULP) No. 11 of 2017 and finally the Petitioner deposited an amount of backwages with the Labour Court. It appears that the amount of backwages have already been withdrawn by the legal representative of the deceased employee.

¶21

Considering the above position, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order, which has already been complied with. Considering the quantum of backwages coupled with the fact that the same are already received by the legal heirs of the deceased employee, it would not be appropriate for this Court to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of Indian to determine correctness of the Award dated 28 May 2002 at this distant point of time. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed . Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶22

In view of dismissal of Writ Petition, nothing would survive in the Civil Application the same stands disposed of.

¶23

[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

¶24

___Page No.2 of 2 ___ 27 February 2025

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept., Nashik v. Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Since Decd.) through Lrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept., Nashik v. Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Since Decd.) through Lrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Ajay Khatana

PNB MetLife India Insurance Company Limited vs Way2Safe Imf Private Limited

PNB MetLife India Insurance Company Limited vs Ms Efficient Insurance Brokers Private Limited

Vardhman Exports vs Johnlee Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

Vardhman Exports vs Johnlee Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd.

Tata Motors Finance Limited vs Khetan Singh Rajpoot