Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ganapati Bhikarao Naik vs Nuclear Power Corporation Of India ... on 24 July, 2023
Bench: Hrishikesh Roy, Pankaj Mithal
ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.9 SECTION IV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 27024/2023
(Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 16-12-2020 in WP
No. 71540/2012 10-04-2023 in WA No. 100026/2021 passed by the High
Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad)
GANAPATI BHIKARAO NAIK Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.133578/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.133581/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.133583/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
and IA No.133584/2023-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 24-07-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ MITHAL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. K. Parameshwar, Adv.
Mr. Prasad Hegde, Adv.
Mr. Kailas Bajirao Autade, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned counsel submits that under the scheme for appointment to a member of the land loser’s family, the petitioner as the son-in-law of Bellana Venkana Gouda, was given appointment on 17.10.1992 as a Helper in the Nuclear Power Corporation Signature Not Verified of India Ltd. His service was then regularised. Digitally signed by NITIN TALREJA Date: 2023.07.26 However, on account of the marital discord between the petitioner 10:17:00 IST Reason:
and his wife which led to a mutual divorce between the two on 1 16.06.2001 (Annexure P/12) in Matrimonial Case No. 11 of 1998, the father-in-law had filed complaint to the employer. The petitioner was then terminated from service on 19.04.2002.
In the Award given by the Labour Court on 09.08.2012, the factum of the petitioner being the son-in-law of the land looser at the relevant time was noted and it was therefore held that his termination was wrongful. Accordingly direction was issued for his reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. However, on challenge to the Award by the Management in the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the learned Judge has given finding against the appointee basically because the land looser, who is the father-in-law of the petitioner, had falsely stated before the disciplinary authority that his daughter was never married with the petitioner.
Issue notice on the Special Leave Petitions as also on the prayer for interim relief, returnable in six weeks.
(NITIN TALREJA) (KAMLESH RAWAT)
COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
2