Bombay High CourtWP/6882/2014dispossed offdismiss for default

Sudhakar S/O Namdeo Tade And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra Trough Its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai And Others

2015-04-29Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.M. Badar2 pages

1 29.04.wp.6882.14.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6882/2014 (Sudhakar s/o Namdeo Tade and 9 others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) .......................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ................................................................................................................................................................... Mr.A.L.Deshpande, Advocate for petitioners Mr.Deepak Thakre, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 1 & 4 Mr. Mohta, Adv.for Respondents 2 and 3 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATED : 29th April, 2015.

Heard.

By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to pay the retiral benefits of gratuity and leave encashment to the petitioners. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 have filed an affidavit-in-reply. It is not disputed in the affidavit-in-reply that certain dues of the petitioners are pending disbursement and the same were not paid to the petitioners, due to financial difficulties. It is stated on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 that the dues of the petitioners would be cleared as per their turn, as early as possible and, positively, within a period of one year. It is further fairly stated on behalf of the respondent nos.2 and 3 that since the petitioner no.1 has expired, the dues payable to the petitioner no.1 would be paid

2 29.04.wp.6882.14. to the legal heirs of the petitioner no.1.

We accept the statements made on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 which would be binding on the respondent nos. 2 and 3. The respondent nos.2 and 3 should clear the dues either in installment or in lump sum positively, within a period of one year.

With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE sahare