CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Vs. RASHTRIYA ZILLA PARISHAD WA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. Heard with consent of learned counsel for the parties. By this application it is prayed that judgment dated 08/08/2016 in W.P.No.5583 of 2015 be reviewed. By said judgment, the order passed by the Industrial Court dated 24/04/2015 allowing the complaint filed by respondent No.1-Union was confirmed and it was declared that the complainants were entitled to receive benefits of permanency under the Kalelkar Settlement. It was also directed to bring the members of the Union on C.R.T.E. from the date of completing five years of service. This relief was granted with regard to four members.

(2.) Shri S. D. Chopde, learned counsel for the applicants-original petitioners referred to the averments made in the review application and submitted that after the writ petition was dismissed, the necessary service records were verified for complying with the aforesaid order. According to him, four members of the Union in whose favour relief was granted had never worked with the Zilla Parishad and it was alleged that there was a fraud played by those members in connivance with some officers of the Zilla Parishad in preparing false documents. According to him, the documents filed before the Industrial Court at Exhibits-22, 24, 25 and 29 were all the fabricated documents. He urged that as these documents were taken into consideration by the Industrial Court while granting relief and as these documents indicate the picture otherwise, a case for reviewing the judgment dated 08/08/2016 has been made out. According to him, by virtue of that order, the said members would be entitled for such reliefs for which they are not entitled for in law. He also submitted that a police complaint in that regard was made on 07/11/2016 and said proceedings are pending. It was therefore submitted that case for grant of review was made out.

(3.) Shri N. R. Saboo, learned counsel for original respondent No.1 opposed the application and submitted that the grounds as raised in the review application were without any merit. The members of the Union in fact worked at their respective places and after considering the entire material on record, relief was granted to them. He submitted that the present applicants did not contest the proceedings before the Industrial Court diligently nor did they lead any evidence. He then referred to various communications to indicate the fact that even otherwise, the said members were entitled for relief. He therefore submitted that there was no error apparent to invoke review jurisdiction. Shri A. D. Sonak, learned Assistant Government Pleader appears for non-applicant No.2.