Gujarat High Court
Jetpur Nagarpalika Now Jetpur Navagadh ... vs Nanduben Arjanbhai on 8 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2182 of 2009
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
JETPUR NAGARPALIKA NOW JETPUR NAVAGADH NAGARPALIK
Versus
NANDUBEN ARJANBHAI & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR RR TRIVEDI(941) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MP SHAH(2418) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 08/12/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
By the present Special Civil Application, the
petitioner Nagarpalika has impugned the judgment
and award dated 15.5.2008 passed by the learned
Labour Court, Rajkot whereby the Reference (LCR)
Nos.405 of 1991 and 438 of 1991 stand partly
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
allowed.
2. Mr. Bhavesh P. Trivedi, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner has submitted that
both the respondent workmen were engaged on daily
wages of Rs.24.40 ps. as garden labourer with the
petitioner Nagarpalika. That their services came
to be terminated on 31.1.1991. Aggrieved by the
removal, the respondent workmen raised a dispute
before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Rajkot
who by order dated 6.5.1991 made a reference to
the learned Labour Court. He submits that the
reference was made under Sections 25F, 25G and
25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ["ID
Act" for short] and in the reference, prayer was
made for reinstatement with back wages. He
further submits that while rejecting the prayers
of the respondent workmen, the learned Labour
Court has held that there is a breach of Section
25H of the ID Act and in lieu of the
reinstatement, since the respondent workmen
attained the age of superannuation, the learned
Labour Court has awarded compensation of
Rs.40,000/- each to both the workmen from the
date of their retrenchment till the date of their
superannuation. He submits that the respondent
workmen could not prove their case for breach of
Sections 25F and 25G of the ID Act. He submits
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
that the learned Labour Court has erroneously
appreciated the evidence to come to the
conclusion that there is breach of Section 25H of
the ID Act, inasmuch as, the petitioner
Nagarpalika has employed other persons in place
of the retrenched workmen. He submits that the
breach of Section 25H of the ID Act has been held
dehors the proper evidence brought on record. He
submits that the learned Labour Court has relied
upon the statement of the witness of the
Nagarpalika in cross-examination whereby it has
been stated by the said witness that if new
workers are engaged, they are also being paid at
the same rate. He, therefore, submits that the
present Special Civil Application be allowed.
3. Per contra, Ms. Kruti M. Shah, learned
advocate appearing for the respondent workmen
submits that the respondents were working as
garden labourers in the Garden Department of the
Nagarpalika and they were executing their duties
sincerely and without any notice or notice pay,
their services came to be terminated. She submits
that the respondents were working with the
Nagarpalika since long and therefore, in breach
of the provisions of the ID Act, the learned
Labour Court has rightly granted lump sum
compensation from the date of retrenchment till
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
the date of superannuation. She submits that even
looking at the amount awarded to the respondent
workmen, no interference is called for as the
same is just and proper and after taking into
account the daily wages which were being paid to
the said respondents. She submits that the
impugned order be upheld and the present Special
Civil Application be dismissed.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties and
perused the documents on record.
5. At the outset, it is to be noted that the
respondent workmen have not challenged the award
passed by the learned Labour Court. The learned
Labour Court has given cogent reasons for
rejecting the claim of the respondent workmen in
respect of the breach of provisions of Sections
25F and 25G of the ID Act. However, it is to be
noted in the present case that the witness of the
Nagarpalika in his cross-examination has stated
that the new workmen who were engaged were being
paid the same wages as was being paid to the
respondents. The said statement is on record by
way of oral evidece. In view thereof, it cannot
be said that the learned Labour Court has erred
in awarding compensation to the respondent
workmen. Further, it is also to be noted that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
respondent workmen had attained age of
superannuation during the pendency of the
proceedings before the learned Labour Court and
therefore, the award for grant of lump sum
compensation is also just and proper, inasmuch
as, the same has been awarded from the date of
termination till the date of superannuation. No
infirmity has been pointed out from the documents
on record in respect of the findings arrived at
by the learned Labour Court. No interference is
called for in the present Special Civil
Application. The present Special Civil
Application is devoid of merits and is,
accordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged.
Interim relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith.
No order as to costs.
6. It is further submitted by the learned
advocate for the petitioner Nagarpalika that the
amount of compensation being Rs.40,000/- each
towards both the respondents has been deposited
in this Court by way of Cheque dated 17.7.2009 in
favour of the Registrar, High Court of Gujarat,
Ahmedabad on 21.7.2009. This Court by order dated
8.7.2009 had directed that the said amount be
kept in a fixed deposit till the final outcome of
the present Special Civil Application.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
7. In view of the dismissal of the present
Special Civil Application, it would be open for
the respondents to make appropriate application
to the registry of this Court for withdrawal of
the amount of compensation so deposited along
with interest accrued thereon.
Upon making appropriate application, the
registry is directed to verify the identity of
the respondent workmen and accordingly, release
the amount of compensation along with interest
accrued thereon.
The present Special Civil Application
accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN
