Gujarat High Court
Lalitaben Madhubhai Chauhan vs Nareshbhai Bachubhai Muniya, ... on 28 September, 2021
Bench: Mr. Justice R.M.Chhaya, Biren Vaishnav
C/MCA/549/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/09/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 549 of 2020
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5252 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 550 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5251 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 551 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5249 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 554 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5250 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 555 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5247 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 556 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5248 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 553 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5245 of 2017
With
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 552 of 2020
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5246 of 2017
==========================================================
LALITABEN MADHUBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
NARESHBHAI BACHUBHAI MUNIYA, CHIEF OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAJESH P MANKAD(2637) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. DHAWAN JAYSWAL, AGP, for the Opponent(s) No. 3
DEEPAK N KHANCHANDANI(7781) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR CHAITANYA S JOSHI(5927) for the Opponent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Page 1 of 4
Downloaded on : Wed Sep 29 01:55:41 IST 2021
C/MCA/549/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/09/2021
Date : 28/09/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
R.M.CHHAYA)
1 Heard Mr.Rajesh Mankad, learned advocate for the applicants in
all the matters, Mr.Dhawan Jayswal, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for the State Authorities in all the matters, Mr.Chaitanya Joshi,
learned advocate for respondent No.2 in all the matters and Mr.Deepak
Khanchandani, learned advocate for respondent No.1 in all the matters.
2 By a group of writ petitions, the applicants herein, who were
working as teachers and Tedagar in Balmandir run by Talaja Municipality
had approached this Court and prayed for reinstatement, backwages as
also the benefit of being regularized. The group of writ petitions came to
be allowed vide common judgment and order dated 29.01.2020, wherein,
this Hon'ble Court observed thus:
"28. Resultantly, all the matters are ALLOWED. The respondent
- Municipality is DIRECTED to reinstate each of the petitioners
in each matter and to pay all of them except three petitioners of
SCA Nos. 5247/2017, 5251/2017 and 5252/2017 who no longer be
serving due to age criteria, the wages / salary from July, 2016
onwards, equivalent to that giving to those who in service with
them and made permanent on the principle of fair wages and
policy of equal pay for equal work and also to make contribution /
pay amounts towards EPF and other miscellaneous provisions, in
accordance with law.
28.1 Further, let the steps be taken by respondent No.3 - EPF
Commissioner in this regard, IMMEDIATELY. If, the remaining
amount is not deposited by the respondent - Municipality within
C/MCA/549/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/09/2021
the period of TWELVE WEEKS from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order again if, as per the decision of the 'State of Karnataka
vs. Uma Devi (supra), the respondent - Municipality has not
undertaken the task of regularizing the services of the petitioners -
employees, their case shall be considered for the same and if, the
respondent - Municipality has already carried out that exercise
and has denied such benefits to them, the petitioners shall be at
liberty to take recourse available to them under the law."
3 As the aforesaid directions were not carried out by the authorities,
the applicants - original petitioners in each petition have preferred these
petitions under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts' Act, 1971.
4 In response to the notice issued by this Court and other orders
passed by this Court, the respondents have appeared. It is also a matter of
record that the order passed by the learned Single Judge was challenged
by the authorities by way of filing Letters Patent Appeals No. 36 of 2021
and allied matters which also came to be dismissed. The record again
further shows that against the order in the Letters Patent Appeal, Special
Leave Petition was filed before the Apex Court which has also been
dismissed.
5 Mr. Deepak Khanchandani, learned advocate appearing for
respondent No.1, states that the payment has been made as per the
directions issued in para 28 of the judgment. The said fact is also agreed
upon by Mr.Rajesh Mankad, learned advocate for the applicants -
C/MCA/549/2020 ORDER DATED: 28/09/2021
original petitioners in these group of applications.
6 It is further pointed out by the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties that the Provident Fund amount as directed by this
Court is yet to be deposited which is likely to take some time. According
to Mr.Deepak Khanchandani, learned advocate, the same shall be
deposited latest by 16.10.2021. As far as the directions issued in para 28.1
of the judgment is concerned, Mr.Khanchandani, learned advocate,
submits that the issue of regularization of each petitioners have been
considered by the Municipality and the same is rejected, the order of
which shall be communicated to each petitioners as expeditiously as
possible.
7 In light of the aforesaid developments which have taken place, we
find that the directions issued by this Court stands sufficiently complied
with. With the condition that the Provident Fund amount shall be
deposited within the time stipulated in this order, the applications are
disposed of. Notice is discharged in each application.
(THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA, J)
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
Bimal
