U.O.I., Repres. Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Defence Production, Ministry Of Defence, New Delhi And ORS. v. Mahesh Shriram Kamble And Others

2025:BHC-NAG:1163-DB 1 22wp378.2025..odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 378 OF 2025 (The Union of India and ors Vs. Mahesh Shriram Kamble and ors) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mrs. S.N. Deshpande, Advocate for petitioners. CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATED : 06-02-2025 The only grievance which is being raised is that impugned order imposes huge financial burden upon the petitioners. The issue whether Over Time Allowance should be a part of wages has already been decided by the Madras High Court in Writ Petition No. 609/2011 against which Special Leave Petition is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court. In a similar issue before the Delhi High Court, the benefits have been directed to be granted, subject to the outcome of the SLP. In the impugned order, also a similar course of action has been followed. We therefore, do not see any reason to interfere in impugned the order only on the ground that it creates huge financial burden.

The petition is therefore dismissed. No costs. (ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Belkhede