Gujarat High Court
Padra Nagar Palika vs Ramanbhai Shakarbhai Solanki on 21 October, 2021
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
C/LPA/454/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 454 of 2021
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3082 of 2010
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2020
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 454 of 2021
==========================================================
PADRA NAGAR PALIKA
Versus
RAMANBHAI SHAKARBHAI SOLANKI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS NILAM N CHAUHAN(6635) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR SUBRAMANIAM IYER(2104) for the Respondent(s) No.
1,10,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,9
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 12
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 21/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Ms.Nilam Chauhan for the
appellant Municipality and learned advocate Mr.Subramaniam
Iyer for the respondents- workmen.
2. The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent Act is directed against judgment and order dated
18.9.2019 whereby the petition of the respondents- workmen
came to be allowed with certain observations. The operative
direction reads as under.
".....it is the constitutional obligation of the State to
accord the sanction of required manpower to enable
the local bodies to achieve their objects. It is thus
C/LPA/454/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
hoped that the State would consider the application
already made by the Nagar Palika for sanction of the
required manpower including the Tedaghar i.e. for
the post of Caretaker, with the sense of urgency.
Once the posts are sanctioned, the monetary
benefits as a consequence of the permanent status
of the workmen shall follow from the date of this
judgment."
3. What was challenged in the Special Civil Application was
judgment and order dated 17.7.2019 passed by Labour Court
No.2, Vadodara. Thereby, the reference of the respondents-
workmen came to be rejected. The workmen have invoked the
jurisdiction of the Labour Court praying for grant of status of
permanent employees and for getting the benefits of
permanency.
3.1 While dealing with the writ petition against the rejection of
the reference, learned Single Judge noticed the factual aspect
that the workmen who were Sweepers and one of them was
Tedaghar, were working since ten years.
3.2 The decisions of the Apex Court were referred to to
observe on the basis of the law laid down therein of continuing
the workmen on ad hoc basis for unduly long period and not
extending them the legitimate benefits of permanency, may
amount to unfair labour practice.
3.3 The learned Single Judge noted that the case of the
respondent employer was not that the educational qualifications
were required for being appointed as Sweepers. The full time
work was taken from all the workmen, however depriving them
the status of permanency and permanent benefits, with such
contents of the facts of the case, learned Single Judge observed
that it was expected from the Municipality to get the posts
sanctioned and to make the appointment regular. Learned
Single Judge specifically observed, "it is pointed out that
C/LPA/454/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
question of sanctioning of the post has been pursued with the
State Government since 23.08.2008 [Exh.38/1] and the question
involved in the petition can be resolved immediately if the posts
are sanctioned."
3.4 It was rightly observed by learned Single Judge, the need
of service of Sweepers in the Municipality is of perennial nature
and that the State is under Constitutional obligation to give
sanction for creation of posts to enable the local body to perform
its civic duties.
4. As noted above, the Municipality has been pursuing for
sanctioning the post with the competent authority of the State
Government since 2008. Considerable time has passed without
any fruitful developments in that regard at the end of the State
Government. When the work of Sweepers in the Municipality is
available and such work is of permanent kind and the
Municipality has already requested, the lethargy on part of the
State Government not responding to the proposal of the
Municipality and in not sanctioning the posts, cannot be said to
be proper.
5. In the facts of the case, we do not find any error in the
order of learned Single Judge and the observations made therein
to exercise jurisdiction in the Letters Patent Appeal, at the same
time we find that it would be expedient to require the competent
authority of the State Government to look into long pending
application of the Municipality for sanctioning of posts. The
State Government through its competent authority shall
therefore decide such proposal expeditiously and preferably
within four months. All the applications stated to be pending in
the year 2008 as above, it would be still open for the
Municipality to move another and fresh application giving the
C/LPA/454/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
details of the present need and the requirements of the post. The
same shall be decided by the State Government in light of the
observations in order of learned Single Judge as well as present
order.
6. It is true that in the eventuality if the posts are sanctioned
and the petitioners are absorbed on such posts conferring them
the status of permanency, the benefits resulted thereupon
should be afforded to them without booking any further delay.
We noticed that learned Single Judge has in the impugned order
provided that upon sanctioning the posts, the monetary benefits
as consequence of permanent status shall be given from the date
of the impugned order. Such direction is not only premature but
unwarranted as well, in as much as such benefits if and when to
be awarded, shall have to be given from the date of actual
appointment of the respondents in the event of sanctioning of
the posts by State Government.
7. The said part of direction of learned Single Judge stands
modified. Accordingly, subject to above clarification and
modification, the impugned order of learned Single Judge is
sustained and not interfered with.
The present Letters Patent Appeal is not entertained.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION
In view of disposal of the main Letters Patent Appeal, the
Civil Application will not survive. Accordingly, it is disposed of.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE,J)
Manshi
