Bhavnaben Dharamsinhbhai ... vs Registrar
2021 Latest Caselaw 14212 Guj

     C/SCA/884/2020                                        ORDER DATED: 16/09/2021



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 884 of 2020
==========================================================
                 BHAVNABEN DHARAMSINHBHAI VACHHANI
                               Versus
                             REGISTRAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DARSHIT N ADHYARU(10908) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PJ MEHTA(467) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR DG CHAUHAN(218) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RONAK D CHAUHAN(7709) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                  Date : 16/09/2021
                   ORAL ORDER

1) Leave to amend. Necessary amendment shall be carried out forthwith.

2) RULE. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties waive service of notice of rule for and on their behalf.

3) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs;

" (A) Be pleased to pass appropriate order quashing and setting aside the award passed by the ld. Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot of Reference (IT) No. 171/2015 dated 09/10/2019 notified on 11/11/2019 Annexure 'H' in the interest of justice;

or in the alternative Be pleased to remand the award Annexure 'H' to the ld. Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot for considering all necessary evidences existed in the petitioner's service record in the interest of justice within six months or Be pleased to grant the pay scale of 4000-6000 Rs from the date of Ref 01/01/2015 in the interest of justice."

4) It is submitted that the petitioner may be granted regular pay-scale at minimum such scale from the date of filing of the reference, in view of the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in case of the State of

C/SCA/884/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2021

Punjab & Ors. Vs Jagjit Singh & Ors., reported in (2017) 1 SCC 148.

5) The facts, which are not in dispute are that the petitioner was selected as an adhoc Trained Primary Teacher in the establishment of "Bal Mandir" Scheme of Gujarat Agriculture University, Junagadh by virtue of oral interview held on 16.07.1993 on fixed salary of Rs.600/- per month. The respondent has issued an Office Order regularizing the said Primary Teacher on 08.04.1994. The Director of campus of the respondent University has again passed an order of regularization w.e.f 11.04.1996 by virtue of order dated 05.08.2000. The Registrar of the respondent University has closed the establishment of "Bal Mandir" Scheme w.e.f 01.04.2008 notification and issued an Office Order in favour of the petitioner to discharge her functions as an Attendant in Telephone Exchange of Junagadh Agriculture University.

6) Learned advocate Mr. Mehta has submitted that though the petitioner joined in the respondent University from 16.07.1993, the said service of trained Primary Teacher, Bal Mandir has not been considered by the Tribunal and her new services as an Attendant from 2008 is only taken into account. Thus, it is submitted that the Tribunal has committed grave error by not counting the service of the petitioner as continuous from 1993 to 2008.

7) Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to accept the regular pay scale of Rs.4,000-6,0000/- w.e.f from 01.01.2015, if the same is granted. Accordingly he has amended the prayer clause. .

8) Learned advocate Mr. Chauhan appearing for the respondent- University has submitted that the impugned award may not be set aside as

C/SCA/884/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2021

the same is passed after careful consideration of all facts. He has submitted that in order to accommodate the petitioner, the respondent authority has in fact, appointed her after the school was close-down. He has submitted that generosity was shown by the respondent University to the petitioner so she may not suffer.

9) I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, since the petitioner is ready and willing to accept the regular pay scale w.e.f 01.01.2015 to the pay-scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/-, the Court has examined the matter keeping in mind the aforesaid request.

10) The facts as stated hereinabove are not in dispute. From the documents produced on record, more particularly, the order dated 13.08.1996, it is revealed that the petitioner was in service. However, it appears that thereafter, the petitioner has completed probation period on 11.04.1996 and thereafter, the petitioner has demanded the benefits of regularization in the pay-scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/- as she was continuously working. The petitioner was working as a Primary Teacher, and thereafter since the school was closed in the year 2008, she was appointed as an Attendant by the University. Since she was not paid the regular pay scale, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute in the year 2015 and the same was referred by the appropriate authority on 13.01.2015. The Labour Court has rejected the reference vide impugned award on 09.10.2019 by observing that the petitioner was not appointed as a regular employee. It is also observed by the Labour Court that no evidence was produced in this regard whether she was appointed regularly by the University. However, the documents reveal that she was selected as a Teacher initially in 1996 as a teacher and had undergone the probation period also.

       C/SCA/884/2020                                 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2021



11)    Since the petitioner has been serving under the respondent

University initially as a Primary Teacher, and thereafter, as an Attendant and has completed more than 10 years, it would be appropriate that she may be granted the regular pay scale from 01.01.2015 on the pay scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/- so that after rendering the service of so-many years, she may not be denied her legitimate right. It is not the case of the University that her services are not needed since today also she is working as an Attendant without there being any complaint against her. Thus, she has been serving satisfactorily on such post.

12) In this view of the matter, the writ petition stands allowed. The respondent University is directed to grant her regular pay scale of Rs.4,000-6,000/- w.e.f. 01.01.2015 and accordingly fix her pay and grant her consequential benefits. The impugned award dated 09/10/2019 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot in Reference (IT) No. 171/2015 is hereby quashed and set aside. Necessary orders shall be passed within the period of three months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) VISHAL MISHRA