Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs The Secretary on 3 August, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/22097/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/08/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 22097 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
THE SECRETARY
================================================================
Appearance:
MR DHARMESH DEVNANI, AGP(1) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
JEET Y RAJYAGURU(8039) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 03/08/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT
(1) RULE. Learned advocate Mr.Jeet Rajyaguru appears
and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of
the respondent No.1. Though notice was served no one
appears on behalf of respondent No.2.
(2) The present petition has been filed by the
petitioner challenging the judgement and award dated
06.10.2018 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot
in Reference (I.T.) No.178 of 2002, whereby and
wherein the Tribunal has partly allowed the reference
of the workmen of the respondent No.1-Sangathan and
C/SCA/22097/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/08/2021
has directed the present petitioner-State to
regularize the services of the workmen Shri Babubhai
Ghela w.e.f. 01.04.1977 and in the case of Hussain
Tapu w.e.f. 01.10.1978.
(3) Learned Assistant Government Pleader has
submitted that the workmen were granted the benefits
of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 by the
order dated 07.11.1989 and their pay fixation was
also done. He has submitted that after the workmen
had completed 10 years of services, their pay was
fixed as per the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 and the same could only have been done
after their services from their initial dates of
appointment has been considered. It is submitted that
the award of the Labour Court directing the
petitioner-State to regularize their service from
their initial dates of appointment would be de hors
the provision of the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988. Further, it is submitted that the Apex
Court in the case of The State of Gujarat vs. PWD and
Forest Employees Union and Ors., 2019 (03) Scale 642
has categorically, after examining the various
provisions of the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988, prescribed the formula of fixing of pay.
It is submitted that thus, the pay-scale is precisely
fixed vide order dated 07.11.1989, after the workmen
of the respondent No.1-Sangathan completed 10 years
of service.
(4) Learned advocate Mr.Jeet Rajyaguru for the
C/SCA/22097/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/08/2021
workmen of the respondent No.1-Sangathan has
submitted that the award of the Labour Court may not
be disturbed since it is established fact that the
workmen were appointed in the year 1977-78
respectively and had completed 240 days of services.
(5) The entire claim of the workmen is premised in
the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. It is
not in dispute that vide order dated 07.11.1989, the
petitioner-State has fixed the pay of Rs.750/- as
per the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and
accordingly, they were given the place in the pay-
scale of Rs.750-940/-.
(6) The Apex Court in the case of State of Gujarat
vs. PWD Employees Union and Ors., 2013 (12) S.C.C.
417, after examining the scheme of Government
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 has held that the daily
wagers, who have completion of 10 years of service,
would be entitled to minimum pay-scale. Thereafter,
in the judgement in the case of State of Gujarat vs.
PWD Employees Union and Ors, reported in 2019 (3)
Scale 642, the Apex Court, while considering the
former judgement between the same parties reported in
2013 (12) S.C.C. 417, has clarified the
implementation of the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988.
(7) In the present case, it is not in dispute that
after completion of 10 years of service, the workmen
of the respondent No.1-Sangathan are placed in the
C/SCA/22097/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/08/2021
same pay-scale of Rs.750-940/-. The Supreme Court in
the subsequent judgment has clarified five exceptions
which were raised by the State. The exception (iv) is
reads as under:
"The worker is given benefit of past services
considering the earlier period on which he worked
for more than 240 days in a year."
(8) The Apex Court, while examining Exception (iv)
in Paragraph No.15 of the judgment has held thus:
"15. Insofar as exception (iv) mentioned by the
appellant is concerned, there appears to be some
merit therein. For counting the number of years for
giving benefit to the workers in terms of judgment
dated July 09, 2013, only those years would be
taken into consideration wherein these workers had
worked for 240 days or more in a year i.e. in
consonance with the GR dated October 17, 1988.
Furthermore, there is no direction in the judgment
of this Court to the effect that the period of
service of 240 days in a year should be only in the
initial year and not thereafter. In fact, when the
learned senior counsel for the respondents were
confronted with the aforesaid position, they
conceded to this position."
(9) Thus, it is clarified that only those years in
which the workmen has completed 240 days in a year,
are required to be considered for conferring the
benefit of the Resolution dated 17.10.1988, and there
is no direction in the earlier judgment(i.e. 2013
(12) S.C.C. 417) to the effect that the period of
service of 240 days in a year should be only in the
initial year and not thereafter.
(10) In the considered opinion of this Court, the
C/SCA/22097/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/08/2021
award of the Labour Court travels beyond the law
enunciated by the Apex Court in the aforesaid
judgements. The order dated 07.11.1989 passed by the
petitioner-Department is in fact in consonance with
the law enunciated by the Apex Court as their pay
fixation has been precisely done as per the
provisions of the Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988 after they have completed 10 years.
(11) In this view of the matter, the impugned order
dated 06.10.2018 is hereby quashed and set aside. It
is clarified that if the workmen of the respondent
No.1-Sangathan if are already granted further benefit
as per the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988,
the same shall not be recovered / reversed and the
entire pay fixation and the service conditions shall
be regularized as per the law enunciated by the Apex
Court in the above mentioned judgements rendered by
the Apex Court as noted hereinabove. With such
clarification, the present petition is disposed.
(12) The present petition is allowed to the aforesaid
extent. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Sd/- .
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
***
Bhavesh-[PPS]*
