Gujarat High Court
Ishwarbhai Becharbhai Vaghela vs Range Forest Officer on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4987 of 2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5846 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
ISHWARBHAI BECHARBHAI VAGHELA
Versus
RANGE FOREST OFFICER & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRAKASH G PANDYA(3041) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.HARSH SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 29/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Since all the petitions raise identical questions of law and fact, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the purpose of convenience, the facts as set out in Special Civil Application No. 4987 of 2023 have been taken into consideration.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah waves service of Rule on behalf of respondent. Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined
3. This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the award passed by the learned Labour Court, Nadiad in Reference LCN No.27 of 2018 dated 30.11.2022 whereby, the Labour Court has awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- with 9% interest in lieu of reinstatement as well as back wages.
3.1. It is the case of the present petitioner that the petitioner was joined as a gardener and working since 01.06.1982 and was getting daily wages of Rs.296/-. On 16.11.1993, the service of the petitioner came to be terminated which was the subject matter of challenge in Reference Case No. 126 of 1994 filed before the learned Labour Court, Nadiad wherein the learned Court has partly allowed the reference in favour of the petitioner on 12.12.2008 directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with 20% back wages. The petitioner was joined and has worked up to June, 2017 and again he was orally terminated on 15.07.2017 which was again challenged before the learned labour court by filling reference being LCN No.27 of 2018 which was again awarded in favour of the petitioner on 30.11.2022 Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined however, learned Court has granted meager amount of Rs.30,000/- compensation, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah or the State. 4.1. Learning advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya submits that indisputably the petitioner has worked with the respondent from 1982 to 1993 and thereafter, from 2009 to 2014. Learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya submits that though learned Court has believed the continuous service of the petitioner from 1982 to 15.07.2017 however, has awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/-. Learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya submits that the documentary evidence were placed on record below mark 14/1 by the respondent showing the attendance of the present petitioner during the aforesaid period and therefore, instead of granting reasonable compensation learned Labour Court has awarded meager amount of Rs.30,000/-. In that background this petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned order deserves to be set aside.
4.2. Per contra, learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah submits that Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined after the petitioner joined with the respondent and after termination order, the petitioner did not work from 1994 to 2008 due to termination order and thereafter, he was reinstated pursuant to the award passed by the learned Labour Court and has worked up to 2014. Learning AGP Mr.Harsh Shah submits that to establish the claim of work from 2014 to 2017 no documentary evidence was placed on record and therefore, learned court is justified in granting the lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- and in that background no interference is required.
5. Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties and on referring the reasons assigned by the learned labour Court it emerges that the learned Labour Court has awarded the reference in favour of the petitioner by holding termination illegal. Indisputably, this award is not challenged by the respondent and has attained finality. Prior to the termination, the petitioner was terminated in the year 1994 which was challenged subject matter of challenge in the Reference case No.126 of 1994 wherein, the learned Labour Court has granted relief of reinstatement with 20% back wages. Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined The said award was also not challenged by the respondent and therefore, it attained finality and pursuant to the award, the service of the petitioner was reinstated in the year 2009 by the respondent. Again as per the claim of the petitioner, he served continuously up to 15.07.2017 and thereafter, the termination was ordered without following due procedure prescribed under section 25F of the I.D.Act. Learned Court while holding the termination illegal, has believed the continuous service from 1982 to 15.07.2017 in SCA No.4987 of 2023 and continuously worked from 2001 to 2017 in SCA No. 5846 of 2023. At the end, learned Court has awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.70,000/- respectively, which in the opinion of this Court is unreasonable and unjustified.
6. This Court has referred the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.908 of 2023 wherein, in an identical situation, this Court has observed as under:
Thus, while calculating the number of years of services, we proposed to deduct the number of years service for which there is delay in preferring reference. After deduction of such number of service, we propose to give compensation in the following tabular Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025 undefined form:
Sr No. Total no. of years for Amount of lump sum lump sum compensation compensation 1 5 to 10 years Rs.3.00 lacs 2 10-15 years Rs.5.00 lacs 3 15-20 years Rs.7.5 lacs
7. Considering the above ratio, in the opinion of this Court the lump sum compensation awarded in both the references enhanced up to Rs.7,50,000/- and the petition is required to be allowed.
8. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
9. In SCA No.4987 of 2023 the respondent is directed to pay the lump sum compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- instead of Rs.30,000/- to the petitioner and in SCA No.5846 of 2023 the respondent is directed to pay the lump sum compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- instead of Rs.70,000/- to the petitioner .
10. The same shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of four months from today. Any amount already paid be adjusted against this lump sum compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) ARCHANA S. PILLAI Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by MRS. ARCHANA SAJEEVKUMAR PILLAI(HC01899) on Fri Oct 10 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 06:32:15 IST 2025