Rajabhai Nathabhai Mevada vs State Of Gujarat

                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




      C/SCA/17239/2022                            ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023

                                                                                 undefined




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17239 of 2022

==========================================================
                         RAJABHAI NATHABHAI MEVADA
                                   Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAJESH M CHAUHAN(2470) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR SANJAY UDHWANI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

                              Date : 13/09/2023

                                ORAL ORDER

In the facts of the case, the petition was taken up for final hearing with consent and request of both the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

1.1 Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Sanjay Udhwani waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent State.

1.2 Heard learned advocate Mr.Rajesh Chauhan for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent State.

2. In the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for directions against the respondent authorities to grant the benefits of Resolution dated 17.10.1988 as well as Resolution dated 15.9.2014. It was next prayed that the case of the petitioner is required to be Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 20:37:08 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17239/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined considered by granting the benefit of continuity in service as per the judgment and award of the labour court.

3. It is the case in the petition that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1985 as Daily Wager in Vanthali Range and that the petitioner has completed 240 days in each year of service. It was stated that the petitioner's services came to be terminated on 16.11.1993. The petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of the labour court seeking reinstatement with continuity of service and with backwages. The labour court allowed the Reference No.25 of 1994 and by judgment and award dated 7.2.2001, directed reinstatement of the petitioner with 30% backwages, declaring the action of termination on part the employer to be illegal.

3.1 The aforesaid judgment and award of the labour court was challenged by the respondent by filing Special Civil Application No.10629 of 2001. By modifying the award by not allowing the backwages, the rest of the award was confirmed. The petitioner was reinstated in service on 10.3.2006. Thereafter the petitioner retired on 30.6.2022.

3.2 The grievance of the petitioner is that despite above benefits available to the petitioner under Resolution dated 17.10.1988 of the State Government, on the basis of the length of services rendered, the same have not been extended. It is the submission that Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and the provisions thereof came to be adopted by the Forest Department by issuing Notification dated 15.9.2014 and that the petitioner is entitled to claim the benefits thereunder.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17239/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined

4. Learned advocate for the petitioner relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat and Others Vs. P.W.D. Employees Union and Others [(2013) 8 Scale 597], as also subsequent judgment in State of Gujarat and Others Vs. P.W.D. & Forest Employees Union and Others [(2019) 15 SCC 248], in order to assert the claim of benefits under the said Resolutions and to further submit that the benefits are required to be extended in view of the said decision of the Apex Court.

4.1 Learned Assistant Government Pleader though tried in vain to submit that the petitioner has not rendered continuous services, he was entirely at his receiving end when confronted that the award of the labour court granting the petitioner reinstatement, which was confirmed by this court and benefit of continuous service was maintained, in that view, learned Assistant Government Pleader was not in position to contend that the continuity aspect in respect of the services of the petitioner could be permitted by the authorities to be reexamined.

5. As noted above, while the labour court granted reinstatement with 30% backwages in the writ petition filed by the authorities which was Special Civil Application No.10629 of 2001, the court modified the award confirming the benefit of continuity flowing from the judgment and award of the labour court.

5.1 The operative portion of the said decision in the aforesaid Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 20:37:08 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17239/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined Special Civil Application dated 19.12.2005, reads as under, "In the premises aforesaid, this petition is partly allowed. The award granting 30% backwages is quadhed and set aside. The award of reinstatement with continuity of service is confirmed. The award of the Labour Court is modified to the above extent. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs."

5.2 It is trite law that where the labour court has granted reinstatement without expressly denying the benefit of continuity of service, in such order, the continuity of services has to be read into and the workman should be treated as having being reinstated with continuity to be entitled to all benefits flowing from the continuity benefit. In the instant case, the same principle applies. Furthermore, in the above order dated 19.12.2005 in Special Civil Application No.10629 of 2001, this court has specifically observed that the award of reinstatement with continuity of service is confirmed. The continuity is thus expressly granted.

5.3 The Resolution dated 17.10.1988 confers the benefits on the ground of completion of requisite number of years of service. Extending the benefit of continuity, the petitioner's services will attract the beneficial provisions of Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The Resolution dated 17.10.1988 read with Resolution dated 15.9.2014 which is by the Forest Department adopting the provisions of Resolution dated 17.10.1988 were considered by the Supreme Court in P.W.D. Employees Union and Others (supra) as well as in subsequent decision in P.W.D. & Forest Employees Union and Others (supra).

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17239/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/09/2023 undefined 5.4 In view of the above, the petitioner would be entitled to all benefits on the basis of his continuous service. Learned advocate for the petitioner could successfully rely on the decision of this court in Kalidas Bhikharam Dudhrejiya Vs. State of Gujarat which was Special Civil Application No.1420 of 2022 decided on 24.3.2022 in which also the continuity was granted to the petitioner by the labour court who was entitled to the consequential benefits on the basis of the continuity.

6. In light of the above, the prayers in the petition deserves to be granted. All the benefits flowing from and in accordance with the Resolution dated 17.10.1988 read with Resolution dated 15.9.2014 of the State Government shall be granted to the petitioner in accordance with the aforesaid two decisions of the Supreme Court.

6.1 The benefits shall be paid to the petitioner within ten weeks from the date of receipt of the present order. If not paid within the stipulated time, the amount payable shall carry interest at the rate of 8% from the date of filing of the petition.

7. The petition stands allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) Manshi Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 16 20:37:08 IST 2023