Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

Popat Sakharam JadhavversusChandu Shantaram Choudhari

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The contempt petition is dismissed as the High Court order did not direct payment of back wages or terminal dues and reinstatement is not applicable after the petitioner’s superannuation.

Summary

Petitioner Popat Sakharm Jadav was terminated on 03‑12‑2002 and successfully challenged the termination in IDA No.18/2016, obtaining an order for reinstatement with 50% back wages. The employer appealed that order before the Bombay High Court (Writ Petition No.14322 of 2023), which was dismissed on 05‑02‑2026 and the dismissal was upheld on review on 24‑02‑2026. The petitioner, having superannuated in 2018, filed a contempt petition alleging that the employer’s failure to pay back wages and terminal dues violated the High Court’s order. The Court observed that the 05‑02‑2026 order merely set aside the earlier punishment and did not direct payment of any dues, and that reinstatement was no longer possible. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed, with the Court indicating that the petitioner may pursue other legal remedies to recover the amounts due.

Issues considered

  • Whether the employer’s non‑payment of back wages and terminal dues amounts to contempt of the High Court order dated 05‑02‑2026.
  • Whether the High Court order expressly directed the employer to pay such dues.

Subjects

  • termination of service
  • back wages
  • contempt of court
  • reinstatement
  • superannuation
  • labour law
  • industrial dispute

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:45518


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                                37 CONT. PETITION NO. 590 OF 2026
                                          IN WP/13787/2023


                                     POPAT SAKHARAM JADHAV
                                               VERSUS
                                 CHANDU SHANTARAM CHOUDHARI
                                                  ...
                               Mr. S.N. Lavekar, Advocate for petitioner
                                    Ms. R.R. Tandale, AGP for State
                                                  ...

                                                  CORAM :     ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
                                                  DATE :      28th SEPTEMBER, 2026


            ORDER :



            .             The services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated

            03.12.2002.     The said termination was challenged by the petitioner in

            Reference (IDA) No.18/2016, which was allowed by quashing and setting

            aside order of termination dated 03.12.2002 and directing reinstatement

            with 50% back wages. Respondent / employer challenged the said order

            before this Court vide Writ Petition No.14322 of 2023. The said petition was

            dismissed by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 and application of the

            review of the said order is also rejected by the order dated 24.02.2026.
                                     2                            37_CP_590_2026



Present petition is filed contending that by not making payment of back

wages and other terminal dues to the petitioner, who has retired during

pendency of the litigation, the respondents have committed contempt of

order dated 05.02.2026 passed by this Court. Perusal of the order dated

05.02.2026 passed by this Court will indicate that the order of punishment

which was set aside by the learned Labour Court was set aside. This Court

has not issued any directions to the respondent for payment of terminal dues.

The petitioner has superannuated in 2018 and question of reinstatement does

not arise. In view of the above, the contempt petition stands dismissed. It

will be open for the petitioner to take recourse of such remedies as are

permissible under law for recovery of amount/s due and payable to him.




                                                ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )




agd


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.