State Of Gujarat vs Jayantikumar Fulabhai Raval
2021 Latest Caselaw 15808 Guj

      C/SCA/11675/2018                               ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11675 of 2018
                                  With
            CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2021
            In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11675 of 2018
================================================================
                           STATE OF GUJARAT
                                 Versus
                 JAYANTIKUMAR FULABHAI RAVAL & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ROHAN SHAH, AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED(64) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

                              Date : 07/10/2021
                               ORAL ORDER

With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the main matter is taken up for hearing.

At the outset, learned advocates appearing for the respective parties have submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the order dated 08.09.2021 passed in Special Civil Application No.8911 of 2018.

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing and setting aside of the award dated 14.02.2018 passed in Reference T. No.69 of 2015 by the Labour Court, Anand.

2. Learned AGP Mr.Rohan Shah has submitted that the impugned award is required to be set aside as the industrial dispute has been raised after a period of 9 years since the workman was relieved in 2006, wherein the dispute was raised in the year 2015. It is submitted that the department had stopped recruitment of part-time workers in view of the Government Resolution dated 10.02.2006, which was followed by the

C/SCA/11675/2018 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

Director of Medical Service, Medical Education, Gandhinagar vide communication dated 09.06.2006 and hence, the service of the workman was terminated. It is submitted that the workman was serving as a part time worker on fixed remuneration and hence, the provisions of Sections 25(F) and 25(H) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the ID Act") are not attracted and there is no question of breach of any provisions. Thus, it is submitted that the Labour Court has erroneously come to the conclusion by holding that there is a breach of Sections 25(F) and 25(H) of the ID Act.

3. In response, learned advocate Mr.U.T.Mishra appearing for the workman has submitted that this Court vide judgment and order dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.7462 of 2012 and allied matters had in fact quashed and set aside the policy of the State Government introduced vide resolution dated 10.02.2006 withdrawing the powers of all the departments to appoint and pay wages to the part timers from the contingency fund. He has submitted that the respondent- workman was terminated in view of the said policy and the said policy was adopted by the Director of Medical Service, Medical Education, Gandhinagar vide communication dated 09.06.2006 and hence, the service of the respondent-workman was terminated. It is submitted that the termination of part-time employees in view of the Government Resolution 10.02.2006 issued by the Finance Department was quashed and set aside, by the Coordinate Bench. It is submitted that the aforesaid judgment is thereafter confirmed by the Division Bench also and hence, the present award may not be interfered with. The view expressed by the Coordinate Bench is followed in catena of decisions of this Court.

4. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective

C/SCA/11675/2018 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

parties.

5. By the impugned award dated 14.02.2018 the Labour Court, Anand has partly allowed the reference by directing the present petitioner to reinstate the workman in service without backwages with continuity of service. It is not in dispute that the service of the workman, who was serving as part timer, was terminated in view of the order passed by the Commissioner, Health Services, Gandhinagar on 09.06.2006, since the appointment of part timers was stopped by the department. It appears that the aforesaid communication has been addressed in view of the Government Resolution of the Finance Department dated 10.02.2006 withdrawing the powers of all the departments to appoint and pay wages to the part timers from the contingency fund. Subsequently, State Government issued another Government Resolution dated 25.04.2012. The object of the Government Resolution dated 10.02.2006 was to reduce the prospective huge financial burden arising out of regularizing part timers in service. The aforesaid policies of the State Government disengaging the part timers was subject matter of challenge before this Court in group of petitions. By the judgment and order dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.7462 of 2012 and allied matters, the Coordinate Bench directed the State Authorities to reinstate all the part time workers, who were terminated in view of the aforesaid policies. The aforesaid judgment has also been confirmed by the Division Bench. The Coordinate Bench has also observed that such part time workers would also be entitled to minimum pay-scale of regularly selected employees in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Jagjit Singh & Ors., (2017) 1 SCC 148. The Coordinate Bench has observed thus:-

"32. As mentioned above, some of the petitioners are out of service after

C/SCA/11675/2018 ORDER DATED: 07/10/2021

coming into force the Resolution of the State Government dated 31.5.2012. These petitioners were working along with their other counter part prior to 31.5.2012. Since number of Class IV employees of the State got affected because of the Resolution dated 31.5.2012, all the affected persons could not obtain the stay from the courts against their termination. There is no denning fact that all these petitioners are affected by the Resolutions of the State Government dated 25.4.2012 and 31.5.2012. They are to be treated at par with the employees who were lucky to get the stay against their termination from the courts. Accordingly, the relief granted by this Court in this judgment shall be extended to all the employees who are affected by the Resolutions of the State Government whether they are continued as outsource employees or are terminated in view of these resolutions."

6. Thus, the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the Coordinate Bench has been confirmed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No.1155 of 2019.

7. In this view of the matter and in light of the settled proposition of law, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the award 14.02.2018 passed in Reference T. No.69 of 2015 by the Labour Court, Anand. Hence, the present writ petition fails and the same is rejected. Notice is discharged.

8. In view of the order passed in the main matter, Civil Application does not survive and the same is disposed of accordingly.

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) ABHISHEK