Spentex Industries Ltd., Nagpur Through Its General Manager (Hr And Admn) v. Sunil S/O Vithoba Wasnik

1 wp8043.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.8043 OF 2017 (SPENTEX INDUSTRIES LTD.....VS.. SUNIL VITHOBA WASNIK.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - None for Petitioner.

Shri S.G.Nigot, Advocate for Respondent.

CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 11, 2019.

None for the petitioner.

Learned Advocate for the respondent/employee has pointed out order passed by this Court on 23rd August 2019. This order shows that after the matter was heard for sometime, the Court expressed that it was not inclined to interfere with the impugned order as it appeared from the record that the default on the part of the petitioner in conducting the proceedings before Labour Court was not willful.

To counter this, the learned Advocate for the petitioner had submitted that to show bonafides the petitioner would deposit Rs.4,00,000/- with the Registry of this Court in three installments, within eight weeks. Accepting the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, this Court permitted the petitioner to deposit Rs.1,25,000/- till 5th September 2019. It is pointed out by the learned Advocate for the respondent/ employee that the amount as assured by the petitioner is not deposited.

2 wp8043.17 Again, with the assistance of the learned Advocate for the respondent, I have gone through the documents placed on record of the petition, and the impugned order. In the petition, the petitioner has not raised any ground on the basis of which it can be said that the Labour Court has committed any illegality or error of jurisdiction which necessitates interference by this Court in the extraordinary jurisdiction.

Hence, the petition is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.Twenty Five Thousand.

The petitioner shall pay the amount of costs to the respondent by Demand Draft within two months. If there is any difficulty in paying the amount directly to the respondent/employee, the same should be deposited before the Labour Court within two months.

JUDGE RRaut..