NARAYAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, with the consent of the parties, writ petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

(2.) The petitioners, who are 83 in number are raising exception to the order passed by the Joint Director (Administration), Handloom, Powerloom & Textiles, Maharashtra State, Nagpur in various applications tendered by them seeking permission to initiate proceedings by impleadment of liquidator of Amravati Cotton Growers Ltd. as respondent. The permission is sought for by the applicants as contemplated by Section 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. It is contended in the application by the petitioners that they were formerly engaged by respondent No. 3 in various capacities like Supervisors, Clerks, Peons, Workers, etc. till the end of 1998 when the mill was in terms of agreement arrived at during the liquidation proceedings agreed to be sold in favour of respondent No.4. The services of the employees are stated to have been terminated by respondent No.3society without following procedure as contemplated by law nor the terms of so called agreement arrived at between the prospective purchaser i.e. respondent No. 4 and the society were adhered to nor the agreement between recognized union and respondent No. 3 was given effect, which has resulted in nonpayment of dues to the workers by the society. It is contended that in terms of the agreement arrived at between respondent No. 3 and respondent No. 4, the applicants were taken in employment sometime in the year 1998 and they remained in employment till 26/9/2001 when respondent No. 3 took back the charge of the mill on account of non fulfillment of the terms of the agreement by respondent No. 4. It is contended by the employees that although respondent No. 4 paid wages to them up to September, 2001. The closure of mill was not as contemplated by the provisions of the Industrial law as no permission was secured from the State Government as contemplated by Section 25(O) of the Industrial Disputes Act. It is contended that the employees are legally entitled to secure monetary benefits towards the wages and other dues from the liquidator who continues to hold control over the affairs of the society. It is further contended that the employees presented the complaint before the Industrial Court, Amravati under the provisions of MRTU & PULP Act, 1971 earlier, however, on account of want of permission as contemplated by Section 107 of the Maharashtra Cooperatives Societies Act, 1970, the complaint presented by the petitioners came to be dismissed by the Industrial Court on 31/1/2004. The petitioners thus approached the Registrar with a request to grant permission in accordance with provisions of Section 107 of the Societies Act. The Registrarrespondent No.2 herein, after considering the contentions raised by the petitioners, proceeded to reject the application in view of the order dated 20/8/2003. The petitioners in this petition are raising exception to the order passed by respondent No.2 on various grounds.

(3.) I have heard arguments advanced by Shri S. D. Thakur, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Shri A. C. Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 and Smt. I. L. Bodade, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents No. 1 & 2.