STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. TARACHAND YASHWANT JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned AGP for State and the learned counsel for respondent employee.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the Industrial Court, Ahmednagar, dtd. 3/9/2012, which allowed the Complaint (ULP) No.76/2007 filed by the respondent seeking declaration that the petitioner department has engaged in unfair labour practice under Item 9 Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition Of Trade Unions And Prevention Of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act, 1971'). The Industrial Court directed to cease and desist from continuing to engage in unfair labour practice and accepting that the employee has rendered service of 8 years and 11 months, issued a direction to consider one-half service of the complainant rendered as temporary on daily wages while computing eligibility of pension and was directed to submit proposal accordingly.

(3.) The State being aggrieved by the said decision has preferred the present writ petition by canvasing that the case of the respondent was covered by Rule 57(1) of the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules, (Pension) Rules, 1982 (for short 'the Rules, 1982'). However, erroneously the Industrial Court has referred to Note (2) and concluded that services of the respondent are pensionable.