1 IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE SIDE SIDE SIDE WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 782 of 2007 PETITION NO. 782 of 2007 PETITION NO. 782 of 2007 EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ENGINEER, ENGINEER, MHAISAI MHAISAI MHAISAI PUMP PUMP PUMP HOUSE, HOUSE, HOUSE, DIVISION NO.1. DIVISION NO.1. DIVISION NO.1. WARANALI WARANALI WARANALI VISHRAMBAUG, SANGLI VISHRAMBAUG, SANGLI VISHRAMBAUG, SANGLI ......... PETITIONERS. PETITIONERS. PETITIONERS. VS. VS. VS. SHRI SHRI SHRI HANMANT NIVRUTTI PATIL HANMANT NIVRUTTI PATIL HANMANT NIVRUTTI PATIL ......... RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT. MR. MR. MR. VIJAY VIJAY VIJAY PATIL FOR THE PETITIONERS. PATIL FOR THE PETITIONERS. PATIL FOR THE PETITIONERS. ..... ..... ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : : : A.P.DESHPANDE, J. A.P.DESHPANDE, J. A.P.DESHPANDE, J. DATE DATE DATE : February 6, 2007. : February 6, 2007. : February 6, 2007. ..... ..... ..... P.C. P.C. P.C. 1.1.1. An An An Order passed by the Industrial Court, Order passed by the Industrial Court, Order passed by the Industrial Court, dated dated dated 24.6.2006 24.6.2006 24.6.2006 modifying the Judgment and the Order, modifying the Judgment and the Order, modifying the Judgment and the Order, passed passed passed by the Labour Court, is challenged by filing by the Labour Court, is challenged by filing by the Labour Court, is challenged by filing this this this Writ Petition. Writ Petition. Writ Petition. 2.2.2. The The The Respondent workmen claimed that he was Respondent workmen claimed that he was Respondent workmen claimed that he was working working working as as as a casual employee, who had worked for more a casual employee, who had worked for more a casual employee, who had worked for more 2 than than than 240 days every year since his appointment so 240 days every year since his appointment so 240 days every year since his appointment so also also also in the year preceding the impugned termination. in the year preceding the impugned termination. in the year preceding the impugned termination. He He He was terminated without any notice or payment of was terminated without any notice or payment of was terminated without any notice or payment of retrenchment retrenchment retrenchment compensation, hence, he filed a compensation, hence, he filed a compensation, hence, he filed a complaint complaint complaint under the MRTU and PULP Act before the under the MRTU and PULP Act before the under the MRTU and PULP Act before the Labour Labour Labour Court. The Labour Court concurring with the Court. The Labour Court concurring with the Court. The Labour Court concurring with the case case case pleaded by the complainant, recorded a finding pleaded by the complainant, recorded a finding pleaded by the complainant, recorded a finding that that that the termination of service is in breach of the the termination of service is in breach of the the termination of service is in breach of the mandatory mandatory mandatory provisions of Section 25(f) of the provisions of Section 25(f) of the provisions of Section 25(f) of the Industrial Industrial Industrial Disputes Act and hence, granted Disputes Act and hence, granted Disputes Act and hence, granted reinstatement reinstatement reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of with full back wages and continuity of with full back wages and continuity of service. service. service. In a Revision preferred by the present In a Revision preferred by the present In a Revision preferred by the present Petitioner, Petitioner, Petitioner, the Industrial Court, relying on the the Industrial Court, relying on the the Industrial Court, relying on the judgment judgment judgment of of of UMADEVI’s Case, modified the Order passed UMADEVI’s Case, modified the Order passed UMADEVI’s Case, modified the Order passed by by by the the the Labour Court and only granted reinstatement in Labour Court and only granted reinstatement in Labour Court and only granted reinstatement in service service service without confirming the status of regular without confirming the status of regular without confirming the status of regular employee. employee. employee. The reinstatement is granted without The reinstatement is granted without The reinstatement is granted without payment payment payment of of of any backwages. It is this Order, which is any backwages. It is this Order, which is any backwages. It is this Order, which is challenged challenged challenged by the Petitioner by contending that the by the Petitioner by contending that the by the Petitioner by contending that the Respondent Respondent Respondent was not terminated but he had voluntarily was not terminated but he had voluntarily was not terminated but he had voluntarily abandoned abandoned abandoned the service. The said point having been the service. The said point having been the service. The said point having been raised raised raised before the Courts below a categorical finding before the Courts below a categorical finding before the Courts below a categorical finding isisis recorded by the Courts below that the Petitioner recorded by the Courts below that the Petitioner recorded by the Courts below that the Petitioner has has has utterly failed to establish that the Respondent utterly failed to establish that the Respondent utterly failed to establish that the Respondent had had had voluntarily abandoned the service. There is no voluntarily abandoned the service. There is no voluntarily abandoned the service. There is no material material material on record to substantiate the said on record to substantiate the said on record to substantiate the said 3 contention contention contention of the Petitioner . of the Petitioner . of the Petitioner . 2.2.2. Perused Perused Perused the impugned Order. The same does the impugned Order. The same does the impugned Order. The same does not not not suffer from any illegality and hence no suffer from any illegality and hence no suffer from any illegality and hence no interference interference interference is called for in exercise of writ is called for in exercise of writ is called for in exercise of writ jurisdiction. jurisdiction. jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition is Consequently, the petition is Consequently, the petition is summarily summarily summarily dismissed. dismissed. dismissed. ..... ..... ..... [A.P.DESHPANDE, [A.P.DESHPANDE, [A.P.DESHPANDE, J.] J.] J.]