Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Dineshbhai Laxmanbhai Solanki on 24 August, 2023
Bench: Devan M. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1150/2023 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1150 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15274 of 2019
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1150 of 2023
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1152 of 2023
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14612 of 2019
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1152 of 2023
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14612 of 2019
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1152 of 2023
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14612 of 2019
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
DINESHBHAI LAXMANBHAI SOLANKI
================================================================
Appearance:
MR MANAN MEHTA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Appellant(s) No. 1,2
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 24/08/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
The two Letters Patent Appeals arise from common judgment
and order of learned Single Judge dated 28.2.2022 delivered in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1150/2023 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2023
undefined
Special Civil Application No.14612 of 2019 preferable to F/Letters
Patent Appeal No.16477 of 2023 and Letters Patent Appeal No.1150
of 2023 which correspondence to Special Civil Application
No.15274 of 2019.
2. Both the appeals were taken up for consideration
simultaneously to be treated by this common order.
Order in Civil Application (For Condonation of Delay):
3. As far as F/Letters Patent Appeal No.16477 of 2023 is
concerned, it delayed by 439 days. Seeking to condone the delay,
Civil Application No.1 of 2023 is filed.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Manan Mehta
points out from the averments in the application that the passage of
time is largely and mainly attributed to the decision making process.
In the aforesaid view and further in view that the other Letters Patent
Appeal arising from the judgment and order of learned Single Judge
is ripe to be heard, the delay is condoned as the sufficient cause is
made out.
5. The application for delay condonation is accordingly allowed.
Registry shall list the Letters Patent Appeal in separate Board
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1150/2023 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2023
undefined
today itself by giving final number to it.
Order in Letters Patent Appeals:
6. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Manan
Mehta in both the Letters Patent Appeals.
7. Learned Single Judge by common judgment and order has
held that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits of State
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and the decision of the
respondents in denying the said benefits is set aside. As far as the
benefit of leave encashment was concerned, it is directed that the
grant of the same shall be subject to the outcome of Special Leave
Petition stated to be pending before the Supreme Court in that
regard.
7.1 The prayer in the main petition by the two petitioners was to
grant regular pay scale and arrears of such benefits from the date
when the petitioners completed 10 years of service in view of State
Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988. The benefit of Resolution
dated 17.10.1988 is available on the premise and footing of daily
rated workman has rendered continuous service of particular length.
The background for claiming the benefits under the said Resolution
consisted in the facts inter alia that industrial dispute was raised by
the petitioners-workmen before the Labour Court which came to be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1150/2023 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2023
undefined
decided in their favour. The Labour Court, Jamnagar directed
reinstatement of the petitioners - workmen with continuity of service
but without backwages. The said judgment and award came to be
challenged by the respondent authorities in group of petitions which
were Special Civil Application No.19183 of 2016 and allied
petitions decided as per common order dated 23.1.2018.
7.2 The judgment and award of the Labour Court was confirmed.
The benefit of continuity given by the Labour Court to the
petitioners - workmen thus became final to result into entailment of
all consequential benefits. It was in that context that the prayer was
made for grant of benefits under the Resolution dated 17.10.1988 in
the writ petitions.
8. Learned Single Judge noticed the fact that the Labour Court
having granted continuity of service and the same having attained
finality with dismissal of the abovementioned writ petitions filed by
the authorities, the benefits of Resolution dated 17.10.1988 would
become available to the petitioners from their initial date of
appointment on the basis of the length of total service rendered by
the petitioners.
9. In the present case, the continuity benefit is expressly granted
by the Labour Court it is trite that even if the Labour Court has only
provided reinstatement of the workmen without expressly denying
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1150/2023 ORDER DATED: 24/08/2023
undefined
the benefit of continuity, the reinstatement would include the benefit
of continuity. When in the present case, the continuity is expressly
granted, it leaves no doubt that the benefits of Resolution dated
17.10.1988 would enure for the petitioner on the basis of total
services rendered to be counted as continuous as per the judgment
and award of the Labour Court.
10. Once the continuity is granted by the Labour Court and
confirmed by this Court, it has to be taken to its logical end make
available all the benefits of the Government policies available on the
basis of such continuity.
11. For the aforesaid reasons and discussion, the challenge to the
order of learned Single Judge in both the Letters Patent Appeals
stand meritless. Both the appeals are therefore dismissed.
The Civil Applications for stay will not survive in respect of
both Letters Patent Appeals. They accordingly stand disposed of.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(D. M. DESAI,J)
VATSAL
