Wasudeo S/O Atmaram Thakur v. The Gadchiroli District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gadchiroli, Thr. General Manager And ANR

2025:BHC-NAG:10787 1 50-WP-4085-2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4085 OF 2024 Wasudeo S/o. Atmaram Thakur Vs. The Gadchiroli District Central Cooperative Bank and Another Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Ms. D.A. Thongre, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. P.S. Tidke, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. Onkar Ghare, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J .

DATED : 09 th OCTOBER, 1.

The petitioner is challenging the order dated 10.01.2024 passed by Learned Member Industrial Court, Chandrapur in complaint ULP No.7/2018.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the earlier round of litigation, when the matter came before this Court in LPA No.515/2009, issue has already been settled between the parties. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a Complaint ULP No.7/2018 containing therein that the petitioner is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.10,60,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Sixty Thousand Only). She further submits that petitioner is entitled to wages for the balance leave of 300 days on retirement as well as the other benefits, but on the contrary he received only Rs.7,81,228/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only) and therefore, prayed to set-aside the order passed by the learned Industrial Court, Chandrapur and prayed to direct the respondent to pay the amount as claimed by the petitioner.

2 50-WP-4085-2024.odt 3.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the issue was already settled before this Court and the respondent again reopened it, which is not proper on the part of the respondent and again approached Industrial Court to file a complaint. The petitioner has already received Rs.7,81,228/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only), as result of settlement reached between them. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit before the learned Industrial Court admitting the fact of settlement and receipt of said amount.

4.

I have gone through the contentions of the writ petition and the documents placed on record and after going through the order passed by the Industrial Court I find that Industrial Court has observed that the matter was already settled based on the consent letter and affidavit. More particularly, the petitioner has specifically admitted in the affidavit that he has received Rs.7,81,228/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Eight Only). The learned Industrial Court has rightly, dismissed the complaint.

5.

In view thereof, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(S IDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE J.

) Privel