1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2982 OF 2008 (Chandrakala Ganpat Raje .v. Chairman MSEDCL and others) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri V.G. Wankhede, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. 01ST AUGUST, 2008. An order, dated 12.07.2007 passed by the learned Judge, labour Court, Buldana in application under Section 33(C)(II) thereby dismissing the same is under challenge in this writ petition. Shri V.G. Wankhede, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court on 11.06.2003, order reinstatement of the petitioner having found the termination to be illegal and also directed the regularisation of the services of the petitioner. Pursuant to the order made by the High Court on 20th August, 2003, the petitioner came to be reinstated and appointed. The claim made by the petitioner in the application is for payment of back wages for the period from 20th May, 1998 till 20th August, 2003 i.e. the period of unemployment. She, therefore, prayed that she having succeeded in the High Court in the said writ petition, 2 was automatically entitled for back wages and, therefore, her application ought to have allowed. Having heard Shri V.G. Wankhede, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I find that the petitioner did not press her claim for back wages when the petition was finally disposed of by this Court and when the order of reinstatement was made. I have seen the order which does not speak a word about the payment of back wages for her unemployed period after her termination. In my opinion, that was the proper occasion that the petitioner ought to have prayed for back wages in the said writ petition. It is too late to claim back wages under Section 33 (C)(II) of the Industrial Dispute Act which is in the nature of summary jurisdiction when `money due' is to be recovered. Writ Petition is thus dismissed. JUDGE *rrg.