Bombay High Court
WP/13976/2022 of MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND ORS Vs SHRI. PAWLAS NAMDEO DABHADE on 16 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13976 OF 2022 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Pawlas Namdeo Dabhade ...Respondent ________________ Mr. Akshay Shinde with Mr. Santosh Mali for the Petitioners/BMC.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Megha 15_wp_13976_2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13976 OF 2022 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Pawlas Namdeo Dabhade ...Respondent ________________ Mr. Akshay Shinde with Mr. Santosh Mali for the Petitioners/BMC. Mr. Gavit Gulabsingh, A.O., M/West (Establishment) present. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 16 OCTOBER 2026. P.C.:
Petition challenges judgment and order dated 4 January 2018 passed by the Industrial Court, Mumbai, allowing Complaint (ULP) No.389 of 2012 and setting aside the punishment of withholding of one year increment on the Respondent.
I have heard Mr. Shinde, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and have considered the submissions canvassed by him.
One of the reasons why the Industrial Court has allowed the Complaint of the Respondent is non-conduct of enquiry in terms of Page No.
1 of
16 October 2026 2026:BHC-AS:42489
Megha 15_wp_13976_2022 Model Standing Orders. The issue appears to be covered by judgment of this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Others Vs. Suresh Rajaram Kadam
1 in which it is held that enquiry needs to be conducted in accordance with Model Standing Orders. Even otherwise the punishment imposed was only withholding of increment for one year. A period of 8 long years has passed from the date of the impugned order. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order of the Industrial Court.
Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
2026 SCC OnLine Bom 2630 Page No.
2 of
16 October 2026 Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 19/10/2026 11:15:48