The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Dept., Nashik v. Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Since Decd.) Through Lrs.

Sonali Mane 6-WP-844-2004.docx

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 844 OF 2004 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 844 OF 2004 The Executive Engineer,Z.P. Nashik ... Petitioner

Versus

Bhagwat Sadashiv Gharate (Decd.) Thr. Lrs.

Sour. Sindubai Bhagwat Gharate ... Respondent Mr. Ashwinkumar R. Kapadnis for the Petitioner. Mr. Y.M. Pendse for the Respondent.

CORAM

: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 27 FEBRUARY 2025.

P.C. :

1) The Petition challenges Award dated 28 May 2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Nashik setting aside termination order dated 26 June 1980.

2) However it appears that during pendency of the proceedings before the Labour Court the workman apparently passed away on 24 November 1993. Therefore the limited relief granted by the Labour Court was to pay backwages of Rs.29,250/- to the legal representative of the deceased worker. This Court admitted the present Petition by order dated 28 June 2004 and refused to MANE SONALI DILIP grant any interim relief. Since the Award was not implemented the MANE SONALI DILIP Date: 2025.03.01 12:00:47 +0530 ___Page No.

1 of 2 ___ 27 February 2025

Sonali Mane 6-WP-844-2004.docx legal heirs of the employee were required to file complaint of unfair labour practice, which came to be allowed on 4 July 2015 directing the Petitioner to implement the Award of the Labour Court. The legal heirs were thereafter required to file Miscellaneous Criminal (ULP) No. 11 of 2017 and finally the Petitioner deposited an amount of backwages with the Labour Court. It appears that the amount of backwages have already been withdrawn by the legal representative of the deceased employee.

3) Considering the above position, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order, which has already been complied with. Considering the quantum of backwages coupled with the fact that the same are already received by the legal heirs of the deceased employee, it would not be appropriate for this Court to exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of Indian to determine correctness of the Award dated 28 May 2002 at this distant point of time. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. 4) In view of dismissal of Writ Petition, nothing would survive in the Civil Application the same stands disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] ___Page No.

2 of 2 ___ 27 February 2025