The Depot Manager, Msrtc, Gadhinglaj Depot, Kolhapur and Ors. vs Shri. Pandurang Ramchandra Bhogulkar and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

The Depot Manager, Msrtc, Gadhinglaj Depot, Kolhapur and Ors. vs Shri. Pandurang Ramchandra Bhogulkar and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a): stay on the effect, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment & Order dated 23.09.2024; notice to the Respondents returnable on 22nd April, 2025, to be served by private notice by all possible modes of service with affidavit of service before the next date.

Issue for consideration

Whether ad-interim stay should be granted on the effect, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment & Order dated 23.09.2024 passed by the Labour Court No. 1, Kolhapur, pending hearing and final disposal. +1 more

Court's answer

In light of the submissions, since Respondent No. 1 is continuing in service though with a different designation and the amount has been deposited, ad-interim relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (a) — stay on the effect, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment & Order dated 23.09.2024 pending hearing and final disposal.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J., order dated 25.03.2025 on Interim Application No. 3875 of 2025 in First Appeal (ST) No. 3377 of 2025 — The Depot Manager, MSRTC, Gadhinglaj Depot, Kolhapur and Ors. v. Shri Pandurang Ramchandra Bhogulkar and Anr. The appeal challenges the judgment & Order dated 23.09.2024 of the Ld. Labour Court No. 1 at Kolhapur in Application (ECA) No. 84/C-19/2014, under which compensation was awarded (per counsel, considering 100% loss of earning capacity) together with interest @ 12% and penalty. Counsel for the Appellant/Applicant submitted that the entire decretal amount with accrued interest stands deposited before the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation; that the compensated person was reinstated in service as a Peon (hence not 100% loss of earning capacity); and that since the Respondent was absorbed the amount was not deposited, interest and penalty should not be levied. Finding Respondent No. 1 continuing in service though with a different designation and the amount deposited, the Court granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a), staying the effect, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment & Order pending hearing and final disposal; notice was issued returnable on 22nd April, 2025, to be served by private notice by all possible modes with affidavit of service. Interim order only — the merits (interest, penalty, extent of loss of earning capacity) remain open.

79-(a)-IA-3875-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3875 OF 2025. IN

FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO. 3377 OF 2025.

The Depot Manager, Msrtc, Gadhinglaj Depot, Kolhapur And Ors.

...Appellants.

Versus

Shri. Pandurang Ramchandra Bhogulkar And Anr. ...Respondents.

Mr. Yashodeep Deshmukh and Adv. Vaideshi Pradeep for the Appellants.

—————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : March 25, 2025.

P. C. :

TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO

Digitally signed by TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Date: 2025.03.27 13:54:08 +0530

1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the entire decretal amount along with accrued interest is already deposited before the Commissioner for Employees’ Compensation and seeks stay of the impugned Judgment and order.

2. Issue notice to the Respondents returnable on 22^nd April, 2025. In addition to Court notice, advocate for the Appellant/Applicant

to serve the Respondents by private notice by all possible modes of service and file affidavit of service before the next date.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that

the compensation was granted by considering 100% loss of earning capacity of the Applicant whereas the Applicant was reinstated in

1 of 2

Shubham Talle

79-(a)-IA-3875-2025.doc

service though as a Peon and it is not case of 100% loss of earning capacity. He would further submit that the Commissioner has granted interest @ 12% and had also imposed penalty. He would further submit that as the Respondent was absorbed, the amount was not deposited and therefore interest and penalty should not be levied.

4. In light of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant as the Respondent No. 1 is continuing in services though with different designation and the amount has been deposited. Ad-interim relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus:

“(a) Pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, be pleased to grant stay on the effect, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment & Order dated 23.09.2024 passed by the Ld. Labour Court No. 1 at Kolhapur in Application (ECA) No. 84/C-19/2014.”

5. Stand over to 22^nd April, 2025.

2 of 2

Shubham Talle