Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5965-5966 OF 2016
(Arising out of SLP ( C) Nos. 28170-28171 of 2015)
KRUSHNA NARAYAN WANJARI PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE JAI BHARTI SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,
HINGANGHAT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR. RESPONDENTS
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN,J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The limited question that arises in these cases is with
regard to the back wages payable to the appellant. The
Industrial Tribunal, Maharashtra allowed the complaint and
directed the respondent to pay salary to the appellant for the
period from March, 1996 to September, 1997 and December, 2001
JUDGMENT
to October, 2002.
3. The High Court took the view that the Muster Rolls do
not indicate that the complainant was present for performing
the duties. Though, the appellant attempted a review by
producing numerous documents, the High Court refused to
entertain the same.
1
Page 1
4. Having regard to the fact that the documents were
produced before the High Court, we are of the view that the
High Court was not justified in refusing to look into the same.
Afterall, the Industrial Court had looked into the entire
materials and had awarded the salary for the disputed period.
Unless the approach is wholly perverse in the sense that the
Tribunal acted on no evidence, the High Court under Article
226/227 is not justified in interfering with the award. It is
not a court of first appeal to reappreciate the evidence.
Therefore, the appeal is allowed and the impugned orders are
set aside and the order dated 14.03.2012 passed by the
Industrial Court, Nagpur Bench, Maharashtra is restored.
5. Learned counsel for the Management submits that being a
hundred per cent grant-in-aid institution, the liability is on
the State. There cannot be any quarrel with the above
submission. The amounts that have to be paid as per the order
of the Industrial Court, Maharashtra being the salary, are to
JUDGMENT
be paid by the State. The amounts due as per the Industrial
Court's award, shall be paid within a period of three months
from the date of production of a copy of this judgment before
the Education Officer, failing which, the same would carry 12%
interest from the date of order of the Industrial Court and the
officers concerned would personally be liable for the same.
2
Page 2
6. The appeals are disposed of with no order as to costs.
.................J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
.......................J.
[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]
NEW DELHI;
JULY 08, 2016
JUDGMENT
3
Page 3