Ashish Ramdas Bari v. Shram Sadhana Bombay Trust Ssbt College Of Engineering And Technology And ORS
1 of 3 21-CA.11357.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 21 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11357 OF 2025 IN WP/5320/2022 ASHISH RAMDAS BARI AND OTHERS
VERSUS
SHRAM SADHANA BOMBAY TRUST SSBT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY AND ORS ...
Mr. Azizoddin R. Syed, Advocate for Applicants; Mr. A. D. Wange, AGP for Respondent-State.
...
WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5320 OF 2022 SHRAM SADHANA BOMBAY TRUST SSBT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
ASHISH RAMDAS BARI AND OTHERS ...
Mr. Parag V. Barde i/b. Mr. Ajay G. Talhar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A. D. Wange, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Azizoddin R. Syed, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. Chaitanya V. Dharurkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 and 4. ...
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8576 OF 2025 IN WP/5320/2022 ASHISH RAMDAS BARI
VERSUS
SHRAM SADHANA BOMBAY TRUST SSBT COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY AND ORS ...
Mr. Azizoddin R. Syed, Advocate for Applicant; Mr. A. D. Wange, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Parag V. Barde i/b. Mr. Ajay G. Talhar, Advocate for the Petitioner in WP.
Mr. C. V. Dharurkar, Advocate for Respondents. ...
2 of 3 21-CA.11357.2025.odt CORAM :
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATE :
24th NOVEMBER, 2025 P.C.:- 1.
This is an application filed by the Respondent for withdrawal of the entire amount deposited by the Petitioner pursuant to the order dated 12.08.2025.
2.
It is submitted by learned Advocate for the Petitioner that though the learned Tribunal has directed reinstatement of the Applicant with full back-wages, the said order is challenged by the Employer/Management and there is a stay operating in the writ petition. He submits that the Applicant/Respondent be permitted to withdraw the entire amount deposited by the Petitioner. 3.
The application is opposed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner. He submits that the management has challenged the judgment of learned Tribunal and they are disputing the entitlement of the Applicant/Respondent to receive the back-wages. He submits that the application be rejected.
4.
According to learned Advocate for the Respondent, the calculation of back-wages goes upto Rs.90,00,000/- and some odd amount. According to the Petitioner/Management, the amount by back-wages comes to Rs.11,38,390/-. This shows that there is big difference between the calculations submitted by them.
3 of 3 21-CA.11357.2025.odt 5.
There is no dispute that by order dated 12.08.2025, this Court has stayed the effect and operation of the impugned judgment and order of the College/Tribunal, subject to condition that the Petitioner shall deposit the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- in this Court. 6.
There is no dispute that Applicant/Respondent had already received Rs.1,00,000/- in the year 2019.
7.
Considering this aspect of the matter, in my view, the Applicant/Respondent can be allowed to withdraw the part of the amount deposited by the Petitioner.
8.
Accordingly, the Applicant/Respondent is permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- on furnishing regular undertaking before the Registry (Judicial) of this Court. It is made clear that this withdrawal would be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition. The remaining amount be deposited in the fixed deposit. The writ petition be fixed for final hearing on 15.12.2025. 9.
Civil Application No.11357 of 2025 is partly allowed. (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) Tauseef