The Divisional Controller. M S R T C Jalna v. Khandu Kisanrao Chirde

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.266 OF 2005 The Divisional Controller, Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Parbhani Division, Jalna -- PETITIONER

VERSUS

Khandu Kisanrao Chidre, Age-45 years, Occu-Service, R/o Gandhi Chowk, Jalna, Dist. Jalna -- RESPONDENT Mr.D.S.Bagul, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.P.L.Shahane, Advocate for the respondent.

( CORAM : Ravindra V.Ghuge, J.) DATE : 07/06/2018 ORAL JUDGMENT :

1.

The petitioner/Corporation has challenged the judgment of the Industrial Court dated 25/08/2004 by which Complaint (ULP) No.80/2000 filed by the respondent/workman was allowed and his order of reappointment as a fresh employee on 07/08/2000 was set aside by relegating him to the Second Appellate Authority for deciding the quantum of punishment.

2.

This Court has admitted the petition on 20/01/2005 and no

interim relief was granted.

3.

I have considered the strenuous submissions of the learned Advocate for the Corporation and on behalf of the original complainant. Issue is as regards the Appellate Authority of the Corporation modifying a punishment of dismissal from service imposed on an employee and granting fresh appointment. The respondent was awarded the punishment of dismissal from service w.e.f. 17/04/1999. He had approached the departmental appellate authority. The Second Appellate Authority, while maintaining the punishment of dismissal from service, granted fresh appointment to the respondent / employee.

4.

This issue is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment delivered by this Court in Anil Vaijnath Arbad Vs. The Divisional Traffic Superintendent, MSRTC and others [2016(3) BCR 861]. It is concluded that a fresh appointment is possible only if the worker is dismissed from service and without such dismissal, there cannot be issuance of a new appointment order. It is also settled, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Punjab Vs. Krishan Niwas [AIR 1997 SC 2349] and Subhash Vs. Divisional Controller, MSRTC [AIR 2010 SC 2484], that after accepting fresh

employment, an employee cannot challenge the said order and claim continued employment.

5.

However, in this case, the respondent continued as a fresh appointee pursuant to the judgment of the Industrial Court and has attained the age of superannuation on 30/06/2013. Mr.Shahane submits that he has also been paid all retiral benefits pursuant to his retirement after his fresh appointment.

6.

In view of the above, I do not find that any issue survives for the adjudication of this Court in this matter. The writ petition is, therefore, disposed of. Rule is discharged.

( Ravindra V.Ghuge, J.)