LAWS(BOM)-2010-6-32

RAJENDRA RAMCHANDRA TASGAVE Vs. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

Decided On June 08, 2010
RAJENDRA RAMCHANDRA TASGAVE Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners by way of this petition, have prayed vide prayer Clause (a) directions against respondents that they should be directed to pay earned wages to the petitioners. Vide prayer Clause (b), they have prayed that they be paid monthly wages and vide prayer Clause (c), they have prayed that the respondents be directed to pay petitioners their arrears along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

(2.) The facts which are necessary to be cited, are stated thus:

(3.) In so far as balance of the amount is concerned, the petitioners had filed proceedings under Section 50 of the M.R.T.U. Act, for issuance of the recovery certificate. It is at that stage, petitioners were paid arrears of the wages. However, respondents did not pay them their monthly earned wages thereafter. The Labour Court therefore, directed the respondents by its order dated 05-09-1992 to deposit arrears of the monthly wages from January 1992 till the date of the order within one month. It appears that the respondents did not comply with the said order. This resulted in the petitioners filing criminal complaint (ULP) Nos. 332 of 1992 for non compliance of the order. It appears that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 challenged the order of the Labour Court in Revision Application Nos. 174, 175 and 176 of 1992. The Industrial Court extended the period to deposit the monthly wages. This resulted in the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filing writ petition Nos. 471, 471 and 472 of 1993. In the said writ petitions, an order came to be passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the Labour Court was directed to dispose of the complaints within the specified period. In pursuance of the said directions, complaints (ULP) Nos. 331, 339 and 336 of 1990 were finally heard and disposed of on 30-06-1993, by which order, the said complaints were allowed and the respondents were directed to continue all the complainants, amongst whom were the petitioners, in service with continuity of service and to pay arrears of back wages within one month from the date of the said judgment and order i.e. 30-06-1993.