1 30 caw 494.11.doc srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 494 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.418 OF 2005 Shri Ayubkhan Ismailkhan Lakhamipura ....Applicant vs. The Divisional Controller ....Respondent Mr. M.V. Rawool i/b Mr. P.B. Shah for the Applicant. None for the Respondent. CORAM : K.K.TATED,J DATE : 11/07/2011 PC: 1 Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant. 2 By this Application, the original Complainant seeks direction against the Respondent to award to the Applicant increment as well as other benefits for which the Applicant is entitled. 2 30 caw 494.11.doc 3 A few facts of the matter are as under: It is the case of the Applicant that he joined the services on 5th April, 1989 as a driver and served up-to 25th September, 1995 i.e. till the date of his dismissal. He was issued charge-sheet on 5th May, 1995 for the misconduct under clauses 10, 11, 22 and 35 as per D & A Rules and procedure. Thereafter, Applicant has made an application before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nashik. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nashik submitted with failure report dated 18th January, 1986 and matter was referred to the Labour Court, Nashik. The Labour Court passed award dated 30th June, 2003 in Reference (IDA) No. 18 of 1997 directing the Respondent Corporation to reinstate the Applicant with continuity of service but without any back wages. Pursuant to the said order, Respondent reinstated the Applicant on 29th July, 2004. 4 The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Applicant submits that the Applicant is entitled to increment as well as other benefits during the period from 30th June, 2003 the day on which the Labour Court passed the order and till the 3 30 caw 494.11.doc reinstatement i.e. 29th July, 2004. The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant are not acceptable as the Labour Court as per order dated 30th June, 2003 specifically held that the Applicant was not entitled to any back wages. In any case, the said order is challenged by the Applicant in the present Writ Petition and the same is pending for hearing and final disposal. Allowing the present Civil Application indirectly amounts to allowing Writ Petition partly. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, I do not find any reason to allow the present civil application and the same is dismissed. 5 No order as to costs. (K.K.TATED,J.)