Bombay High Court
SHRINIWAS KANTILAL SAVALEversusNASHIK DISTRICT CENTRAL CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court set aside the Industrial Court’s orders and directed the bank to regularise the petitioners in vacant posts and grant them permanency, applying the precedent of Shivaji Madhav Jadhav v. Nashik District Central Co‑Operative Bank Ltd.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of employees of Nashik District Central Co‑Operative Bank Ltd, filed writ petitions challenging the Industrial Court’s dismissal of their complaints alleging unfair labour practices and seeking permanency of service. They argued that their long, continuous service, the bank’s manpower needs and existing vacancies warranted regularisation. The bank opposed the petitions. The Court relied on its earlier judgment in Shivaji Madhav Jadhav v. Nashik District Central Co‑Operative Bank Ltd (WP 11137 of 2024), which held that such factors justify conversion of temporary employees to permanent status. Applying that precedent, the Court set aside the Industrial Court’s orders and directed the bank to regularise the petitioners in vacant posts, grant permanency, and pay related monetary benefits prospectively within 16 weeks, while prohibiting termination of their services during the process. The writ petitions were therefore allowed and disposed of without costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the dismissal of the petitioners’ complaints of unfair labour practices by the Industrial Court is liable to be set aside.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regularisation and permanency of service based on long continuous service, manpower needs and existing vacancies.
Subjects
- unfair labour practice
- regularisation
- permanency
- industrial court
- co‑operative bank
- precedent
- writ petition
- service continuity
Judgment
Vaishnavi 66-WP-7698-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7698 OF 2026
Pawan Ashok Gaikwad and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Nashik District Central Co Operative
Bank Ltd. ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7701 OF 2026
Dyaneshwari M. Suryawansh and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Nashik District Central CO Operative
Bank Ltd. ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7702 OF 2026
Shriniwas Kantilal Savale ...Petitioner
V/s.
Nashik District Central Co Operative
Bank Ltd. ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7700 OF 2026
Shivaraj Gautam Mechkul and Ors ...Petitioners
V/s.
Nashik District Central Co Operative
Bank Ltd. ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7707 OF 2026
Kiran Suresh Patil and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Page No.1 of 4
31 August 2026
Vaishnavi 66-WP-7698-2026
The Nashik District Central Co-Op
Bank Limited ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7711 OF 2026
Baban Bhavdu Narale and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Nashik District Central Co Op. Bank
Ltd. ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7709 OF 2026
Ambadas Kalu Dhone and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
The Nashik District Central Co-Op
Bank Limited ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7705 OF 2026
Bhushan Bharat Gangurde and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
The Nashik District Central Co-Op
Bank Limited ...Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 7703 OF 2026
Amol Ashok Suryawanshi and Ors. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Nashik District Central Co Op. Bank
Ltd. ...Respondent
________________
Page No.2 of 4
31 August 2026
Vaishnavi 66-WP-7698-2026
Mr. S. R. Nargolkar a/w Mr. S. S. Nargolkar a/w Ms. Shreevidya Nargolkar,
for Petitioner in all Petitions.
Mr. Vishal Tambat, through V.C. a/w Mr. Rochelle Fernandes, for
Respondent.
Case No. WP/7698/2026, WP/7705/2026, WP/7701/2026, WP/7703/2026,
WP/7702/2026, WP/7700/2026, WP/7707/2026, WP/7711/2026,
WP/7709/2026.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 31 AUGUST 2026
P.C.:
1) These Petitions are filed challenging orders passed by the learned
Member, Industrial Court, Nashik, dismissing complaints of unfair labour
practices filed by the Petitioners. The complaints were filed claiming
permanency in the services of the Respondent Bank.
2) Mr. Nargolkar, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioners,
invites attention of this Court to the judgment of this Court in Shivaji
Mahadev Jadhav V/s Nashik District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd, 1 and
submits that the issue involved for the Petition is squarely covered by the
said judgment. Mr. Tambat, on the other hand, opposes the Petitions.
3) After going through the judgment of this Court in Shivaji Madhav
Jadhav (Supra), it is clear that the issue involved in the present Petition
is squarely covered by the said judgment. This Court has considered long
and continuous service, need for manpower and existence of vacancies.
1 Wp 11137 of 2024 decided on 5 March 2026
Page No.3 of 4
31 August 2026
Vaishnavi 66-WP-7698-2026
The judgment delivered by this Court in Shivaji Madhav Jadhav is
binding and needs to be followed.
4) Therefore, for the reasons recorded in the judgment in Sivaji
Madhav Jadhav, the present Petitions succeed. The orders passed by the
Industrial Court in each of the Petitions are set aside. The Respondent
Bank is directed to undertake the exercise of regularization of services of
the Petitioners against available vacant posts, subject to individual
eligibility, educational qualifications and service record. The Respondent
Bank shall thereafter grant permanency and continuity of service to the
eligible Petitioners. However, the monetory benefits flowing out of
permanency shall only be admissible prospectively from the date of
regularization. Monetary benefits arising out of permanency shall be
paid within a period of 16 weeks. Till completion of exercise of
consideration of cases for permanency, services of the Petitioners shall
not be terminated.
5) With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are allowed and
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Page No.4 of 4
31 August 2026
Checking your session…