Gujarat High Court
Hiteshbhai Arjanbhai Parmar vs Jamkandorna Gram Panchayat on 30 August, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/405/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 405 of 2020
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4401 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
HITESHBHAI ARJANBHAI PARMAR
Versus
JAMKANDORNA GRAM PANCHAYAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 in SCA NO.405 OF 2020
MR PRABHAKAR UPADHYAY for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 in SCA NO.4401 OF
2020
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Respondent (s) No. 1 in SCA NO.4401 OF
2020
MR PRABHAKAR UPADHYAY for the Respondent (s) No. 1 in SCA NO.405
OF 2020
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No.2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 30/08/2022
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
C/SCA/405/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022
1. RULE returnable forthwith.
2. With the consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, the petition is taken up for
final hearing.
3. In both these petitions under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the challenges are
respectively by the employer and the employee
to the award of the Labour Court, Rajkot dated
22.10.2019.
4. Facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner
of Special Civil Application No.405 of 2020 had
filed an application invoking the provisions of
Section 13A of the Industrial Employment
Standing Orders Act for a prayer that, since the
work of sweeper for the Jamkandorna Gram
Panchayat was of a permanent nature, an
interpretation be made accordingly.
C/SCA/405/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022
5. It appears that pending the proceedings, the
parties i.e. Jamkandorna Gram Panchayat and
the sweeper-Hiteshbhai Arjanbhai Parmar
(petitioner of SCA No.405 of 2020) entered into a
settlement on 25.10.2016. The settlement
arrived at was that the workman would be
engaged on a pay scale as accepted by the Gram
Panchayat. The consent terms were signed by
the then Sarpanch on the very date. The Labour
Court fixed the matter for hearing. However, by
an order of 19.06.2017, the Labour Court opined
that the Sarpanch had no powers to settle the
issue and therefore the settlement was set aside.
6. Ultimately when the proceedings came up for
hearing on merits before the Labour Court,
extensively referring to the provisions of Section
219 of the Indian Penal Code and the various
decisions of the Supreme Court, the Labour
C/SCA/405/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022
Court opined that the Sarpanch has exercised his
powers and the powers of the Labour Court in
collusion were exploited to settle the matter.
The Court found that there was an abuse of
process of law and awarded costs of Rs.25,000/-
to be paid by the Sarpanch in his individual
capacity.
7. Mr.U.T.Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner
- workman in Special Civil Application No.405 of
2020 and Mr.Prabhakar Upadhyay learned
counsel for the petitioner - Jamkandorna Gram
Panchayat in Special Civil Application No.4401
of 2020 have assailed the award of the Labour
Court on the ground that rather than extensively
reproducing the decisions of the Supreme Court
and opining on the complicity of the parties in
abusing the process of law, the Labour Court
should have decided the matter on merits.
C/SCA/405/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/08/2022
8. Perusal of the award would indicate that except
reproduction of Rojkam, the Labour Court has
not entered into the merits and except
reproducing the judgments of the Supreme
Court, no decision is taken on the question raised
by the respective parties.
9. Therefore, the award dated 22.10.2019 in
I.E.S.O. Application No.2 of 2016 passed by the
Labour Court, Rajkot, is quashed and set aside.
The proceedings are remanded to the Labour
Court to decide afresh on merits in accordance
with law.
10. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. Rule
is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
ANKIT SHAH
