Bombay High Court

SHREE CLASSES THR POA MUKESH PAIGUDEversusSHASHIKANT BALKRISHNA GURAV

Decided: 19 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The award is set aside because the petitioner was not properly served with summons, and the reference is remanded for a fresh hearing.

Summary

The petitioner, M/s. Shree Classes, filed a writ petition challenging an award dated 28 August 2022 passed by the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Pune, in Reference IDA No. 76 of 2019. The sole ground raised was that the petitioner was never served with summons because the bailiff attempted service at an incorrect address and then tried to serve a different person, Mr. Mahesh Bargude, who refused to accept the summons. The High Court examined the bailiff’s report and concluded that proper service had not been effected, rendering the award vulnerable to being set aside. Consequently, the Court set aside the award and remanded the reference to Labour Court No. 4, Pune, to be decided afresh, directing that no fresh notices need be issued. The parties were instructed to appear before the Labour Court and fix hearing dates, with the matter to be decided expeditiously, preferably within six months. The writ petition was partly allowed and disposed of without any order as to costs.

Issues considered

Whether the failure to serve summons on the petitioner invalidates the award passed by the Labour Court.
Whether the High Court can set aside the award and remand the reference for fresh hearing without requiring fresh service of notice.

Subjects

service of summons
labour court award
writ petition
remand
procedural fairness
industrial dispute

Judgment

Vaishnavi                                                41-WP-4334-2024


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                       WRIT PETITION NO. 4334 OF 2024

M/s. Shree Classes                                     ...Petitioner

                      V/s.

Shashikant Balkrishna Gurav                           ...Respondent
                                  ________________
Mr. Yashodeep Deshmukh i/b Mr. Pradip Patil, for Petitioner.
Mr. A. S. Rao, for Respondent.
                                  ________________

                                            CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

                                            DATED: 19 AUGUST 2026

P.C.:


1)          By this Petition, Petitioner challenges award dated 28 August
2022 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Pune in Reference
(IDA) No. 76 of 2019.


2)          I have heard Mr. Deshmukh, the learned counsel appearing for
Petitioner and Mr. Rao, the learned counsel appearing for the
Respondent.


3)          The sole ground raised by the Petitioner in the present Petition is
that he did not receive summons in respect of the reference. My
attention is invited to the bailiff’s report, which indicates that the bailiff
approached the address indicated in the statement of claim. He did not


                                     Page No.1 of 2
                                    19 August 2026
Vaishnavi                                                  41-WP-4334-2024


notice the Petitioner at that address. Therefore, he went to another class
and met another person and Mr. Mahesh Bargude and attempted to serve
the summons on Mr. Mahesh Bargude. The service report indicates that
Mr. Mahesh Bargude refused to accept the summons. Mr Deshmukh
Submits that Mr. Mahesh Bargude operates an altogether different
establishment by name of Shreeyash Classes. It therefore appears that
the Petitioner has not been duly served with the notices in the reference.
On that count, the reference deserves to be remanded for the purpose of
affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.


4)          Accordingly, Award dated 20 August 2022 is set aside. Reference
IDA No. 76 of 2019 is remanded to Labour Court No. 4, Pune, for being on
1 September 2026 decided afresh. The parties shall appear before the
Labour Court alongwith copy of this order downloaded from website of
the Court and apply for fixation of date(s) of hearing in the reference. It
shall be not necessary for the Labour Court to issue fresh notices to
either of the parties. The Labour Court shall proceed to decide the
reference as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of 6
months. All contentions of the parties on merits are expressly kept open.


5)          With the above directions, the Writ Petition is partly allowed and
disposed of. There shall be not order as to costs.


6)          The Petitioner shall file written statement on of before 18
September 2026 before the Labour Court.



                                                      [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

                                     Page No.2 of 2
                                    19 August 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…