Bombay High Court
The Chairman, Kisanveer Satara ... vs Mr. Pavan Kumar Babar on 1 November, 2018
Author: Sadhana S. Jadhav
Bench: Sadhana S. Jadhav
Dusane 1/3 903 wps 5142-5144.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5142 OF 2016
The Chairman, .... Petitioner
Kisanveer Satara Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Ltd., Bhuinj. and Anr.
Vs.
Mr. Dilip Vishnu Kadam .... Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.5143 OF 2016
The Chairman, .... Petitioner
Kisanveer Satara Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Ltd., Bhuinj. and Anr.
Vs.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Babar .... Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.5144 OF 2016
The Chairman, .... Petitioner
Kisanveer Satara Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Ltd., Bhuinj. and Anr.
Vs.
Mr. Shivaji Kashinath Babar .... Respondent
::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2018 01:01:58 :::
Dusane 2/3 903 wps 5142-5144.doc
Mr. Suresh Pakale I/by Mr. Shankar M. Katkar for Petitioner.
Mr. Vaibhav R. Gaikwad for the Respondents.
Coram : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.
Date : 1st November 2018
P.C.:
1 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2 The statement was made at bar on instructions that the
Management needs to take a decision on the issue of compliance of the orders of the Labour Court, which were upheld by the Industrial Court while dismissing the revision. Unfortunately, the petitions are pending since 2016 and in the interregnum two of the workmen have retired on superannuation and are awaiting service benefits, to which they were entitled to by virtue of the orders of the Labour Court and the Industrial Court.
3 Learned counsel for the petitioner once again submits that the meeting could not be held and the next meeting is scheduled to be held on 4th November 2018. On instructions, an assurance is given that the issue of compliance with the order of the Labour Court and Industrial Court will be taken up on the Agenda. ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2018 01:01:58 :::
Dusane 3/3 903 wps 5142-5144.doc
4 There was no interim relief granted by this Court,
however in the order dated 4th March 2016, liberty was given to mention if any coercive steps are being taken by the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that since the petitions were pending, they had hopes that the Management would take every efforts to comply with the orders of the Labour Court and therefore, had not filed any execution petition. Since two workmen have already retired, the liberty granted to mention the matter is withdrawn. The respondents are at liberty to take appropriate steps in order to execute the orders passed by the Labour Court as well as the Industrial Court. S.O. to 30th November 2018.
(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 03/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2018 01:01:58 :::