ZILLA PARISHAD, JALNA Vs. BABAN MAROTRAO BOKADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these matters, the petitioner/Zilla Parishad has challenged the judgment and order of the Industrial Court dated 19/10/2007 in Complaint (ULP) No. 43/2006 and 15/10/2007 in Complaint (ULP) No. 130/2002, respectively.

(2.) I have considered the strenuous submissions of the learned Advocates for the respective sides. Mr. Deshpande, learned Advocate for the Zilla Parishad has drawn my attention to the 13 grounds formulated in the petition. I have also considered the judgments cited by Mr. Deshpande, which have been specifically mentioned in Ground Nos. 10, 11 and 12 of the petition.

(3.) This Court has already taken a view in similar set of facts in the matter of Municipal Council, Tuljapur v. Baban Hussain Dhale in WP No. 1843/2015 and connected matters decided on 26/02/2015 and Mukhyadhikari, Nagar Parishad, Tuljapur v. Vishal Vijay Amrutrao and others, [2015(5) Mh.L.J.75] that in service matters pertaining to State instrumentalities, unless permanent vacant posts are available, the Industrial Court cannot declare unfair labour practices against the employer and cannot grant regularization in service merely on the basis of having completed 240 days in continuous employment in one calendar year preceding the date of reference as is provided for under section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and on the basis of Standing Orders 4C of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.