Dismissed¶14

Wasudeo S/O Atmaram Thakur v. the Gadchiroli District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli, Thr. General Manager and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Mar 2025WP/4085/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wasudeo Atmaram Thakur v. The Gadchiroli District Central Co-operative Bank; WRIT PETITION NO.4085 OF 2024; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; Industrial Court Chandrapur; Complaint ULP No.7/2018; unfair labour practice complaint; settlement; consent letter; affidavit admitting receipt; LPA No.515/2009 earlier round; retirement benefits; wages for 300 days balance leave; Rs.7,81,228/- received versus Rs.10,60,000/- claimed; writ petition dismissed, no order as to costs; Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J.; decided 09th October 2025.

What did the court decide?

None; writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs ¶14

Wasudeo S/O Atmaram Thakur vs the Gadchiroli District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli, Thr. General Manager and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:10787

¶2

1 50-WP-4085-2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4085 OF 2024

¶4

Wasudeo S/o. Atmaram Thakur Vs. The Gadchiroli District Central Co- operative Bank and Another

¶5

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

¶6

Ms. D.A. Thongre, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. P.S. Tidke, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. Onkar Ghare, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J .

¶8

DATED : 09th OCTOBER, 2025

¶9

The petitioner is challenging the order dated 10.01.2024 passed by Learned Member Industrial Court, Chandrapur in complaint ULP No.7/2018.

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the earlier round of litigation, when the matter came before this Court in LPA No.515/2009, issue has already been settled between the parties. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Complaint ULP No.7/2018 containing therein that the petitioner is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.10,60,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only). She further submits that petitioner is entitled to wages for the balance leave of 300 days on retirement as well as the other benefits, but on the contrary he received only Rs.7,81,228/(Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only) and therefore, prayed to set-aside the order passed by the learned Industrial Court, Chandrapur and prayed to direct the respondent to pay the amount as claimed by the petitioner.

¶11

2 50-WP-4085-2024.odt

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the issue was already settled before this Court and the respondent again reopened it, which is not proper on the part of the respondent and again approached Industrial Court to file a complaint. The petitioner has already received Rs.7,81,228/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only), as result of settlement reached between them. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit before the learned Industrial Court admitting the fact of settlement and receipt of said amount.

¶13

I have gone through the contentions of the writ petition and the documents placed on record and after going through the order passed by the Industrial Court I find that Industrial Court has observed that the matter was already settled based on the consent letter and affidavit. More particularly, the petitioner has specifically admitted in the affidavit that he has received Rs.7,81,228/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only). The learned Industrial Court has rightly, dismissed the complaint.

¶14

In view thereof, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed . No order as to costs.

¶15

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE J.)

¶16

𝒫𝓇𝒾𝓋𝑒𝓁

Wasudeo S/O Atmaram Thakur v. the Gadchiroli District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli, Thr. General Manager and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wasudeo S/O Atmaram Thakur v. the Gadchiroli District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli, Thr. General Manager and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sudhakar Madhav Gaurkar and Others vs Sou. Kanta Ishwar Nande and Another

The President Maharashtra Rajya Khadi Gramodyog Mandal and Others vs Popat Thamaji Shelar

Shri Shivshankar Shikshan Prasarak Mandal through Its Secretary and Another vs the Education Officer Secondary and Others

Dadasaheb Pralhad Kate vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Prakash Atmaram Pawar and Others vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary

Ankush Mahadu Lakhe vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others