Sau. Rangu Vitthal Gondane v. The Registrar Panjabrao Krishi Vidyapeeth Akola And Aother

1 wp2750.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2750/2014 Sau. Rangu Vitthal Gondane ..Versus..

The Registrar, Panjabrao Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola and another - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------- - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : Z.A. HAQ, J.

DATE : 29.1.2016 Heard Shri M.R. Pillai, advocate for the petitioner and Shri A.R. Patil, advocate for respondent no.1. The petitioner/employee has challenged the order passed by the subordinate Courts rejecting her claim for reinstatement and back wages. According to the petitioner, the respondents have illegally terminated her from service. The subordinate Courts have concurrently recorded that the respondents/employer had published the seniority list of the employees working on daily wages on 31st October, 1995 i.e. prior to termination of services of the petitioner. It is further recorded that the petitioner/employee has not been able to show that the respondents/employer have breached any

2 wp2750.14 statutory provisions while terminating her services. The petitioner has not been able to point out any perversity in the findings recorded by the subordinate Courts. I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned orders. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that though the complaint filed by the petitioner is dismissed, the subordinate Courts have directed the respondents/employer to provide work to the petitioner on daily wages as and when available and though the work is available, it is not provided. Shri Patil, learned advocate for the respondent no.1/employer disputes the contention of the petitioner. Be that as it may, the respondents/employer shall provide work to the petitioner on daily wages as and when available considering her seniority on the basis of her engagement on work in 1979. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. JUDGE Tambaskar.