Zilla Parishad Jalgaon Through Chief Exe.Officer v. Kamalbai Kadu Nehere And ORS

*1*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4762 OF 2001 ZILLA PARISHAD JALGAON THROUGH CHIEF EXE.OFFICER

VERSUS

KAMALBAI KADU NEHERE AND ORS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4763 OF 2001 ZILLA PARISHAD JALGAON THROUGH CHIEF EXE.OFFICER

VERSUS

SINDUBAI RAMDAS PATIL AND ORS.

...

None for the parties.

...

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 11th May, 2017 Per Court:

None appeared for the parties on 09.05.2017 in this special sitting in vacation. None appears even today. However, I deem it fit to dispose of both these matters in the light of the peculiar facts which are being considered in the forgoing paragraphs.

In both these matters involving identical Respondents/ Workers, the Petitioner/ Zilla Parishad is aggrieved by the interlocutory

*2* order dated 17.09.2001 delivered by the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) Nos.154/2001 and 128/2001, respectively. By the said interlocutory order, the Industrial Court granted interim relief to all these Respondents by directing the Petitioner/ Zilla Parishad to pay half salary and other consequential benefits of Class-IV employees till the decision in the main complaints.

By order dated 26.11.2001, this Court admitted both these identical petitions and did not grant any interim relief to the Petitioner/ Zilla Parishad.

Considering the peculiar facts as above, identical interlocutory orders impugned in both these petitions, have not been stayed. The said interlocutory orders are in operation for the last 16 years. In the light of the above, both these Writ Petitions are disposed of by directing the Industrial Court, Jalgaon to decide Complaint (ULP) Nos.154/2001 and 128/2001, if not already decided, as expeditiously as possible and preferably on or before 28.02.2018. Needless to state, since the interlocutory order is passed on prima facie appreciation of the complaints, the Industrial Court shall decide both the complaints, if not already decided, on their own merits and without being

*3* influenced by the observations of the Industrial Court in the interlocutory orders. Rule is discharged.

kps (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)