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
Checking your session…