Bombay High CourtWP/1589/2018disposed off

Prakash Shamrao Bhute v. The Divisional Traffic Superintendent

2018-08-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice S.C. Gupte2 pages

Chittewan 1/2

64. WP 1589-18.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1589 OF 2018 Shri Prakash Shamrao Bhute ...

Petitioner

Versus

The Divisional Traffic Superintendent M.S.R.T.C. Sangli Division at Sangli ...

Respondent .....

Mr. Manoj A. Patil for the Petitioner.

Mr. G.S. Hegde for the Respondent.

.....

CORAM : S.C.GUPTE, J.

DATE : 6 AUGUST 2018 P.C. :

This writ petition challenges an order passed by the Industrial Court at Sangli refusing to grant interim relief. The Petitioner is an employee of the Respondent corporation. He was charge sheeted and a departmental enquiry was held in pursuance of his reply to the charge sheet. After concluding the enquiry, the Respondent corporation issued a show cause notice proposing termination of his services. At this stage, the Petitioner moved a complaint of unfair labour practice before the Labour Court. In the complaint, he asked for interim relief restraining the corporation from terminating his services. The application was rejected by the Labour Court and the Industrial Court also refused to interfere in revision, though, throughout, there was an ad-interim order in favour of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner has come before this court. Since this is a stage where the Petitioner is required to show cause, the petition can be conveniently disposed of by directing the Petitioner to show cause and challenge an order, if any, passed, despite his having shown cause.

Chittewan 2/2

64. WP 1589-18.doc Accordingly, the petition is disposed of by directing the Petitioner to reply to the show cause notice within two weeks from today. In case the Respondent corporation passes an order of termination, after considering his reply to the show cause notice, the Petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the final order. All rights and contentions of the parties on merits are kept open. If the order of the Respondent corporation is against the Petitioner, the order shall not be implemented for a period of three weeks.

(S.C. GUPTE, J.)