Krushna Narayan Wanjari vs The Jai Bharti Shikshan Sanstha, Hinganghat

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5965-5966 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP ( C) Nos. 28170-28171 of 2015)

KRUSHNA NARAYAN WANJARI PETITIONER

VERSUS

THE JAI BHARTI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, HINGANGHAT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR. RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN,J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The limited question that arises in these cases is with

regard to the back wages payable to the appellant. The

Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra allowed the complaint and

directed the respondent to pay salary to the appellant for the

period from March, 1996 to September, 1997 and December, 2001

to October, 2002.

3. The High Court took the view that the Muster Rolls do

not indicate that the complainant was present for performing

the duties. Though, the appellant attempted a review by

producing numerous documents, the High Court refused to Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by

entertain the same.

JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2016.07.13 16:01:19 IST Reason: 1

4. Having regard to the fact that the documents were

produced before the High Court, we are of the view that the

High Court was not justified in refusing to look into the same.

Afterall, the Industrial Court had looked into the entire

materials and had awarded the salary for the disputed period.

Unless the approach is wholly perverse in the sense that the

Tribunal acted on no evidence, the High Court under Article

226/227 is not justified in interfering with the award. It is

not a court of first appeal to reappreciate the evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the impugned orders are

set aside and the order dated 14.03.2012 passed by the

Industrial Court, Nagpur Bench, Maharashtra is restored.

5. Learned counsel for the Management submits that being a

hundred per cent grant-in-aid institution, the liability is on

the State. There cannot be any quarrel with the above

submission. The amounts that have to be paid as per the order

of the Industrial Court, Maharashtra being the salary, are to

be paid by the State. The amounts due as per the Industrial

Court's award, shall be paid within a period of three months

from the date of production of a copy of this judgment before

the Education Officer, failing which, the same would carry 12%

interest from the date of order of the Industrial Court and the

officers concerned would personally be liable for the same.

2

6. The appeals are disposed of with no order as to costs.

.................J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]

.......................J. [ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]

NEW DELHI;

JULY 08, 2016

3 ITEM NO.58 COURT NO.10 SECTION XV

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos. 28170-28171/2015

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 28/01/2015 in WP No. 4730/2012 08/05/2015 in WP No. 4730/2012 08/05/2015 in MCA No. 486/2015 passed by the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur)

KRUSHNA NARAYAN WANJARI Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE JAI BHARTI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA, HINGANGHAT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR. Respondent(s)

(with office report)

Date : 08/07/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Manish Pitale, Adv.

Mr. D.S. Matwankar, Adv.

Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv.

Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Leave granted.

The appeals are disposed of in terms of signed non-reportable judgment.

Pending applications(s) shall stand disposed of.

(Rajni Mukhi) (Renu Diwan) SR. P.A. COURT MASTER

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)

4