A division judge bench of the Justice A.J. Desai and Nisha M. Thakore of Gujarat HC has denied interfering with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge confirming the judgment and award dated 26.11.2018 passed by the learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (T) No.624/2009. The court observed that the appellant failed to satisfy this court with any valid reason on the part of his delay of 7 years in approaching this court after his name was removed from being a daily wage worker.
Facts:
By way of present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant has challenged the CAV order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.21561 of 2019 by which he rejected the reference filed by the present appellant against his termination of services as daily wager worker.
The appellant was working as a daily wage Conductor since the year 1998 and had worked upto 20.02.2002. That, subsequent to communal riots in the State of Gujarat, the original petitioner was not continued as a daily wage conductor. It is the case of the petitioner that he came to know about discontinuation of his service only in the year 2005 when other similarly situated persons were asked to join their services. The original petitioner, therefore, made representation to the respondent Authority which was not answered and therefore, the reference was filed in the year 2009.
The learned counsel for appellant argued that Labour Court has committed an error in dismissing the reference on the ground of delay and laches on the part of the appellant. He submitted that the order which was passed by the respondent in the year 2002, by which the name of the appellant herein was discontinued as daily wage conductor, was never served to the appellant. He further submit that because of the communal riots in the State of Gujarat, services of appellant as daily wage conductor were discontinued, however when he came to know, he made representation which was not answered by the Authority and therefore, the reference was filed in the year 2009. He, therefore, submitted that there is no deliberate delay on the part of the appellant and therefore, has requested to allow the present appeal.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that it is an undisputed fact that the appellant was never taken back on service as daily wage conductor after the year 2002 and the appellant has filed the reference after 7 years i.e. in the year 2009. There is no satisfactory explanation put forward by the appellant herein either before the learned Labour Court or before the learned Single Judge or before this Court. All the contentions which have been raised before this Court have already been considered by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 5 onwards in the order impugned in the present appeal.
Decision:
The present latent appeal was dismissed being devoid of any satisfactorily explanation to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge confirming the judgment and award dated 26.11.2018 passed by the learned Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (T) No.624/2009.
Case: BADESINH FATESINH MAKWANA Versus AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE
Citation: R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1393 of 2022
Coram: Justice A.J. Desai and Nisha M. Thakore
Dated: 07.11.2022
Read Judgment @latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
