Vinod Baba Waghmare And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

34-pil-20-2018.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.20 OF 2018 Jayant Bhagwantrao Satam

...Petitioner

vs.

The State of Maharashtra and Another

...Respondents

WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) NO.29791 OF 2017 Vinod Baba Waghmare and Another

...Petitioners

vs.

The State of Maharashtra and Others

...Respondents

Mr. Aditya Bhagat i/b. Mr. M.V. Thorat, for the Petitioner in PIL No. 20 of 2018.

Mr. V.A. Rathi, for the Petitioners in PIL(L) No. 29791 of 2017. Mr. C.P. Yadav, AGP, for Respondent-State.

Ms. G.K. Hegde, for Respondent No. 2 in PIL No. 20 of 2018. Ms. Seema Chopda, for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in PIL No. 20 of 2018.

Mr. T.R. Yadav, for Respondent Nos. 5 and 7 in PIL No. 20 of 2018. Ms. Pinky Bhansali, for Respdt. No. 3 in PIL (L) No. 29791 of 2017. CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & R.G. KETKAR, JJ.

DATE :

FEBRUARY 20, 2018 P.C.:

.

By filing these Public Interest Litigations, the Petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs.

"(a) The Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ order and/or direction by calling for the relevant record and proceedings from the office of the Respondent Authorities and after going into the legality of the same Vishal Parekar 1/2

34-pil-20-2018.doc direct the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to withdraw the strike forthwith".

(b) Direct the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or its members to resume their respective duties immediately. (c) Direct the appropriate authorities to withdraw the registration of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 if they fail to call of their strike.

(d) Direct the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and/or its members.

(e) Pass any other just and equitable orders in favour of the Petitioners as the nature and circumstances of this case may require."

2.

It is not in dispute that this Court vide interim order has declared the strike illegal. In the circumstances, keeping all the contentions open, the Public Interest Litigations are disposed of as infructuous.

3.

Needless to say that holding the Public Interest Litigations infructuous will not come in the way of any authority or Court for adjudicating the dispute between the parties and the said disputes/proceedings shall be decided on its own merits. 4.

Both the Public Interest Litigations are disposed of. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (SHANTANU KEMKAR, J.) Vishal Parekar 2/2