Maharashtra State Rd.Transport Corporation Jalgoan v. Ramchandra Jaysingh Patil

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2920 OF 1999 (MSRTC, Jalgaon Vs.Ashok Arjun Ahire) WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2925 OF 1999 (MSRTC, Jalgaon Vs.Jagan Tulsiram Sapkale) WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2926 OF 1999 (MSRTC, Jalgaon Vs.Ramchandra Jaysingh Patil) WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2927 OF 1999 (MSRTC, Jalgaon Vs.Anil V.Suryawanshi) WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2928 OF 1999 (MSRTC, Jalgaon Vs.Madhukar Pitambar Dhake) Mr.M.K.Goyanka, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.R.L.Chintalwar, Advocate for respondents.

( CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) DATE : 16/01/2015 PER COURT :

1.

This Court had passed an order on 09/01/2015 as follows :- "1. The learned counsel appearing for the RespondentsEmployees submits that the Respondents were orally terminated by the Petitioner-Employer. Their complaints before the Labour Court at Jalgaon were allowed. The petitioner preferred the Revision Petitions which were dismissed.

2. The petitioner has reinstated all the Respondents-Employees and they have been granted regularization and benefits incidental and consequential thereto. It is, therefore, submitted

that nothing survives in these writ petitions and they are rendered infructuous.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner-Employer does not controvert the said statement, but prays for one week's time to make a statement on the next date.

4. Stand over to 16/01/2015 for orders."

2.

The MSRTC has filed a rejoinder through Mr.Badriprasad Ashruji Mante, Divisional Statistician, MSRTC, Jalgaon, supported with an affidavit, dated 10/09/2013. Mr.Goyanka, learned Advocate, therefore, submits that in light of paragraph No.4 of the rejoinder filed in all these petitions, these writ petitions could be disposed of. 3.

Mr.Chintalwar, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of all the respondents/employees submits that he has received the copy of the said rejoinder on 21/10/2013, he has gone through the said rejoinder, has appraised his clients of its contents, who are present in the Court and as such confirms the statement on instructions made in paragraph No.4 in all these rejoinders. He, therefore, submits that the respondents have no objection if these petitions are disposed of in terms of paragraph No.4 of the said rejoinder.

4.

Paragraph No.4, which is common in all the rejoinders filed by the petitioner reads as under :- "The deponent most respectfully submits that, the petitioner and the respondents accepted the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.2126/2000 and even the said order is implemented. The respondent also accepted the said order and taken the benefit of the permanency from 01/03/2000 and also accepted the arrears given by the MSRTC."

5.

In the light of the statements made before the Court by the learned Advocates, as recorded above, all these petitions are disposed of in terms of paragraph No.4 of the rejoinder, which is reproduced hereinabove.

6.

Rule is accordingly discharged.

( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)