Gujarat High Court
Manjibhai Nathalal Vaghela vs The Collector on 9 August, 2021
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6596 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6697 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6708 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6716 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6719 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4517 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4519 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4520 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6010 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6015 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6032 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6065 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6068 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6069 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4522 of 2021
==========================================================
GHANSHYAMBHAI BHANJIBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
THE COLLECTOR & 2 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
NABIL O BLOCH(7953) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR DHARMESH DEVNANI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 in SCA
No.6596 of 2021, SCA No.6597 of 2021, SCA No.6708 of 2021 and SCA
No.6716 of 2021
MR SAHIL TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No.1,2,3 in SCA No.6719 of
2021, SCA No.4517 of 2021, SCA No.4519 of 2021 and SCA No.4520 of
2021
MR ROHAN SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No.1,2,3 in SCA No.4522 of
2021, SCA No.6010 of 2021, SCA No.6015 of 2021 and SCA No.6032 of
2021
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, APP for respondent(s) No.1,2,3 in SCA No.6065 of
2021, SCA No.6068 of 2021 and SCA No.6069 of 2021
Page 1 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Sep 06 10:59:01 IST 2021
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 09/08/2021
ORAL ORDER
Notice for final disposal made returnable forthwith.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of
notice.
All the matters involve identical questions of fact and
law which are decided by this common order, however, for the
purpose of adjudication, the facts are drawn from Special Civil
Application No. 6596/2021, hereinafter.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking direction
against the respondent no.1 to initiate action and recover the
amount as awarded by the Controlling Authority under the
payment of Gratuity Act, District-Bhavnagar.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that though
directed by the Collector, no recovery has been affected in all
these matters.
4. The Gratuity Applications filed by the petitioners are
allowed and the respondent no.2 and 3 are directed to pay the
concerned amount along with with 10% simple interest from
the actual date of payment.
5. The attention of this Court is drawn to the order dated
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
22.1.2020 passed in Special Civil Application No. 5044 of
2019 and allied matters, where this Court had directed the
grant to be released and amount to be paid within 8 weeks
and if not done within the stipulated time period, the
petitioners were given liberty to take recourse of law
including invoking jurisdiction of this Court for contempt.
6. Following relevant findings and observations are
reproduced hereunder:
"4. Both the sides have been heard at length. The
communication addressed to the Mamlatdar, Jamnagar City
for and on behalf of respondent No.1 by the Executive
Engineer is dated 14.02.2019.
Almost one year has been completed. Nothing has been heard
from the Road and Building Department. There is no
challenge of the said order of controlling authority and
hence, the same has attained finality.
4.1 Considering the fact that the recovery certificate has
been issued after due adjudication and on giving fullest
opportunity to the parties and amount due is of the gratuity
in case of the petitioners who have served for long years. Let
the grant be released and amount be paid within 8 weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If not paid
within the stipulated time period, petitioners shall be at
liberty to take recourse of law including invoking jurisdiction
of this Court for contempt and for other consequential reliefs.
Petitioners shall be also entitled to revive these petitions for
further action, against the department.
The rate of interest would be enhanced to 18% if the amount
is not paid within the stipulated time period and cost of
Rs.20,000/-in the event of non payment."
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
7. This Court in Special Civil Application No. 21281/2019
had passed a detailed order reminding authorities of statutory
obligations in respect of the recovery certificate issued in
connection with the reference which came in favour of the
workman. It would be apt to reproduce some of the relevant
portions :
"5. The stand has been made very clear by the Residential
Collector in his affidavit-in-reply, it is quite apparent
therefore that jurisdictional aspect falls within the realm of
the District Development Officer. The Collector has already
discharged his functions and sent reminder to the District
Development Officer, nothing appears to have been heard
thereafter from the end of the District Development Officer.
There is no material emerging on the record that he has
conducted the meeting. Monthly meeting on regular basis has
been directed to be held in the resolutions dated 25 th
February, 2005 and 2 nd June,2005. Once the recovery
certificate is issued by the Court in the matter, after the long
drawn litigations, the party is compelled to once again take
recourse of law and approach this Court. This lackadaisical
attitude on the part of the concerned authority is neither
desirable nor acceptable at all. The recovery under the
certificate has to be effected as per the recovery of revenue
under the Land Revenue Code and there is a detailed
guideline prescribed in the form of resolution issued by the
State Government. Petitioner had to go from the post to pillar
to get the amount prescribed in the certificate. His having
done all that he could have done at his command,
somewhere, it is an absence of period of limitation prescribed
in completing task of executing recovery certificate is
hampering the process. At the cost of reiteration, it is to be
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
noted that under the law, for recovery certificate to be
executed,there exists vaccume so far as the time limit is delay
is caused in executing the recovery certificate on account of
such lacuna and the required attention to this essential cause
is missing more often than not. This is a class of people who
have scant means at their disposal, not to refer to their very
humble social background which does not permit them any
access to these authorities except by means of legal
documents in the form of recovery certificate that too, after a
protracted litigation.
Execution of recovery certificate within a reasonable time
period therefore assumes an importance and in absence of
any statutory period, a reasonable time period shall need to
be regarded which cannot go beyond six months and in the
event of auction etc. beyond one year period.
P.I.L. S.C.A. No.3954 of 2001 filed before this Court was also
against the uproar of non execution of recovery certificate,
pursuant to which revenue department issued resolution
dtd.25.02.2005, which contain following details.
1. Competent authority / office is required to make note of
recovery certificate in the register.
2. They are required to be duly examined and if they lack any
details or other requirement, they be returned on an issuance
of notice to the judgment debtors entire procedure be
completed on urgent basis under the Land Revenue Code.
3. It would also be necessary to ascertain whether bank or
any other agency has utilized other resources of recovery.
4. Recovery certificates if are concerning jurisdiction of
Panchayat, they be sent to the concerned Panchayat and the
competent officer be initiated to effect the speedy recovery.
5. Any lackadaisical approach on the part of any
officer/employee or deliberate attempt not to act shall be
reported in their confidential report.
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
6. Capacity building efforts by means of training etc. shall be
enhanced.
7. Judgment debtors when are not traceable in consultation
with the senior officer of police department, their hunt be
expedited."
8. Delay in recovery defeats the very purpose and object and
essence of decision of the Court and therefore, the
departmental proceedings be initiated against those who
delayed the recovery.
9. Wherever the debtors take recourse of Court proceedings,
it shall be ensured that the Court matters proceed
expeditiously.
10. For overcoming slow pace in effecting recovery, 'Prant'
office in every district is to act as nodal officer.
11. Officers of the District Collector, D.D.O. & T.D.O. shall
have quarterly accounts of proceeding of recovery certificate.
12. Competent authority is also required to evaluate the
register - 'A' and send the same every month to the Revenue
Department before the 10th day of every English calendar
month. Subsequently, issued resolution dated 02.06.2005
also reiterates this guidelines and adds further that the nodal
officer must organize monthly meeting with the Mamalatdar,
T.D.O. for reviewing.
6. These are thus, very eloquent and specific guidelines,
directions in the form of mandates, pursuant to the PIL.
preferred before this Court. However, they are observed
often in their breach and that is essentially due to absence of
any supervision or administrative guidance on the part of
senior officer.
7. The State has also directed to the officers who are to at the
helm of affair to supervise and it seems that what is lacking is
the execution and lack of proper administration and desired
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
guidance.
8. It is more often than not experienced that Mamlatdar is
assigned the task of recovery without anyone, then following
the same up, reluctantly into piling of the matters as well as
miseries of the creditor workmen. It is thus clear from the
chronology that the petitioner who served the Gujarat State
Electricity Corporation and Design Limited at Thermal Power
Station, Thasra, District - Kheda raised an industrial dispute
in 2013, where he succeeded in the year 2017 and thrice he
approached the labour Court and yet, till date, he has neither
received the amount nor has he been replied to D.D.O. Is
intimated by the Collector in September, 2019 once again
and yet no effective measurements are taken."
8. Resultantly, this application needs to be allowed,
directing the respondent authority to recover the amount of
gratuity as specified in the Recovery Application in each case.
Considering the fact that the respondent no.2 is the Executive
Engineer, Road and Building Division, Finance Department
shall ensure the speedy sanction of the amount specified by
the Controlling authority in each certificate of recovery with
interest bearing in mind the object of Act and also the findings
and observations made hereinabove in other matters of
recovery.
9. This shall have to be released within 10 weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order. If not paid within the
stipulated time period, the petition shall be entitled to invoke
the jurisdiction of this Court including for contempt and for
other consequential reliefs. They will be permitted to also take
other remedial measures as permissible under the law. The
C/SCA/6596/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/08/2021
rate of interest shall be enhanced at 18% and if the amount is
not paid within the stipulated time period, cost of Rs 20,000/-
will be also paid to each petitioner in the event of non-
payment as directed.
10. Petitions are allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
Cost to be the cost in cause. Direct service is permitted.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
ila
