Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1766 (BOM)

ANGAD TRIMBAKRAO NALAWADE v. M/S S R TRANSPORT

IA/251/2026 · 2026-07-10

Shri Sandeep V Marne

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Renuka 20-IA-251-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 238 OF 2011 Angad Trimbakrao Nalawade IN THE MATTER BETWEEN M/S S R Transport ...Applicant ...Petitioner V/s. Angad T. Nalawade ...Respondent ________________ Dr. D. S. Hatle with Mr. Umesh G. Chavan for Petitioner in WP and Respondent in IA. Mr. Ramdas Hake Patil with ms. Shraddha Sagvekar for Respondent in WP and Applicant in IA. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 10 JULY 2026. P.C.: 1) The Petition is ;led challenging the Award dated 22 February 2010 passed by the learned Judge 4th Labour Court, Thane in Reference (IDA) No. 47 of 2004. The Labour Court has directed reinstatement of Respondent with 50% backwages and continuity of service w.e.f. 14 October 2000. 2) The Petition has been admitted by order dated 15 March . 2011. By order dated 24 January 2011, this Court has directed Petitioner Page No. 1 of 4 10 JULY 2026 2026:BHC-AS:28557 Renuka 20-IA-251-2026 to deposit the Awarded amount. Accordingly, an amount of 1,28,800/- has already been deposited by the Petitioner in the present case. 3) I have heard Mr. Hatle, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner and Mr. Hake Patil, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent and have considered the submissions canvassed by them. 4) Perusal of the impugned Award would indicate that employer-employee relationship was established by leading cogent evidence on record. The Labour Court has recorded factual ;nding about existence of employer-employee relationship and there is no warrant for interference in the said ;nding. Therefore it cannot be held that there is any perversity in the said ;nding recorded by the Labour Court. 5) Once the employer-employee relationship got established, the termination is automatically rendered illegal since no retrenchment formalities were followed by the Petitioner-employer. Therefore, the Labour Court has proceeded to treat termination as illegal on account of failure to issue notice and failure to pay retrenchment compensation. 6) It must also be borne in mind that the reference was made in the year 2004 in respect of termination of the Respondent on 14 October 2000. Mr. Hake Patil, submits that during the pendency of the present Petition, Respondent has crossed the age of retirement sometime in the year 2012. Petitioner has already deposited the awarded 50% backwages amounting to Rs. 1,28,800/- which amount has been invested by the Registry in interest bearing deposits. Considering the above Page No. 2 of 4 10 JULY 2026 Renuka 20-IA-251-2026 circumstances in my view ends of justice would be met if the entire deposited amount of Rs. 1,28,800/- together with accrued interest thereon is treated as a lumpsum amount payable to the Respondent in lieu of reinstatement and backwages. Mr. Hake Patil fairly submits that the Respondent is willing to accept the deposited amount with interest as compensation in lieu of reinstatement and backwages. 7) I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:- (i) Impugned Award dated 22 February 2010 passed by the Labour Court in Reference (IDA) No. 47 of 2004 is modi;ed by directing that Petitioner shall pay to the Respondent a lumpsum compensation in lieu of reinstatement or backwages. (ii) Amount of Rs. 1,28,800/- deposited in this Court alongwith accrued interest thereon shall represent lumpsum compensation payable to the Respondent. Respondent shall be at liberty to withdraw the entire deposited amount alongwith accrued interest. (iii) Beyond the lumpsum compensation so awarded, Respondent shall not be entitled to any further bene;ts from the Petitioner in relation to his services. 8) With the above directions, the Writ Petition is partly allowed. Rule is made partly absolute. There shall be no order as to costs. Page No. 3 of 4 10 JULY 2026 Renuka 20-IA-251-2026 In view of the disposal of the Petition, nothing survives in Interim Application No. 251 of 2026 and the same is also disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 4 of 4 10 JULY 2026 Signed by: Renuka S Thakur Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/07/2026 11:15:58