MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears for the petitioner and the respondent No.2. I have heard the learned AGP for respondent No.1.

(2.) Respondent No.2 / complainant had approached the Industrial Court in Complaint (ULP) No.489 of 1990 seeking permanency on the post of Wireman. By the impugned judgment, dated 19.8.1997, the Industrial Court allowed the Complaint, declared that the petitioner is guilty of unfair labour practice and granted permanency with all benefits on the post of wireman on 1.1.1990.

(3.) This issue of granting permanency from a particular date against a State Instrumentality without ascertaining whether a permanent vacant post is available or not and whether the complainant, by his seniority, would be entitled to the said post, has been settled by this Court in the matters of Municipal Council, Tirora and another Vs. Tulsidas Baliram Bindhade [2016 (6) Mh.L.J.867], Mukhyadhikari, Nagar Parishad, Tuljapur Vs.Vishal Vijay Amrutrao and others, [2015(5) Mh.L.J.75] and Municipal Council, Tuljapur Vs. Baban Hussain Dhale in WP No.1843/2015.