Gujarat High Court
Bakul Aromatics & Chemicals Ltd vs Gopalbhai C Shah on 20 January, 2023
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
C/SCA/11494/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11494 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
==========================================================
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 ?
==========================================================
BAKUL AROMATICS & CHEMICALS LTD
Versus
GOPALBHAI C SHAH
==========================================================
Appearance:
M/S TRIVEDI & GUPTA(949) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR HARSHAD K PATEL(2844) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 20/01/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for
the following reliefs :-
"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ
of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or
any other appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing the award dated 9.5.2008 made by the
learned Labour Judge (S.D.), Vadodara in Reference
C/SCA/11494/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2023
No.512/97;
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal
of this petition your Lordships be pleased to stay the
operation and implementation of the award dated
9.5.2008 made by the learned Labour Judge (S.D.)
Vadodara in Reference No.512/97;
(C) Ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of para 8(B)
above be granted;
(D) Such other and further reliefs as deemed just
and expedient be granted."
2. The factual matrix in the present case is as follows :-
2.1 The respondent workman was appointed as Assistant
Manager in the petitioner company and was serving from
04.01.1996 till his dismissal on 15.04.1997. It is the case of the
workman that the dismissal notice was with immediate effect.
Aggrieved, the respondent workman raised a dispute wherein the
reference was made to Assistant Labour Commissioner, Vadodara
as to whether the workman should be reinstated to his original post
with back wages. The said reference came to be numbered as
Reference No. 512 of 1997. Notice came to be issued to the
petitioner company. The parties led the evidence in support of their
contentions. After perusing the evidence and considering the
contentions raised by the parties, learned Labour Court, Vadodara
was pleased to allow the reference and for the reasons stated
therein, directed the reinstatement of the respondent workman to
his original post with continuity of service and 25% back wages.
Aggrieved, the petitioner company has preferred the present
Special Civil Application.
C/SCA/11494/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2023
3. Learned advocate Ms. Nancy Soni appearing on behalf
of M/s. Trivedi & Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner company
submitted that the respondent was not a workman as he was
working in the capacity as Assistant Manager and was exercising
his supervision over eight other employees. She further submitted
that he was also receiving the salary of Rs.6500/- per month, which
is an admitted position. She therefore submitted that the reference
was not maintainable since the respondent was working in the
managerial capacity.
4. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Harshad Patel
appearing on behalf of the respondent workman submitted that in
the present case, the respondent has been dismissed from service
with immediate effect. He submitted that no opportunity was given
to him to explain the charges on which he was dismissed or his
conduct as alleged in the dismissal notice. He submitted that the
respondent was a permanent employee and that being in
permanent service, no due procedure was followed while
dismissing him from service of the petitioner company. He
therefore submitted that the impugned judgment and award is just
and proper and no interference is called for.
5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and
perused the documents on record.
6. In the present case, it can be seen that the dismissal of
the respondent workman has been set aside on the ground that the
principles of natural justice were not followed. The respondent
workman was in permanent service and he was appointed after
interview. He was dismissed with immediate effect without service
of any kind of notice or charge-sheet. It was further held by the
C/SCA/11494/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 20/01/2023
learned Labour Court that the petitioner company had failed to
prove that the respondent was not a workman but was in service in
the managerial capacity. It was also noted by learned Labour Court
from the documentary evidence produced on record that there was
change in the designation and function of the respondent workman.
It was therefore held that respondent was working as a workman
and not in a managerial capacity with the petitioner company.
6.1 It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Harshad Patel
that the impugned judgment and award was stayed by this Court
on 10.12.2008 subject to payment of wages under Section 17B of
the Industrial Disputes Act. The workman was paid the wages
under Section 17B accordingly till his date of superannuation. It is
submitted that as on date, there is no question of reinstatement
and only the issue is with respect to the payment of 25%
backwages.
7. In the present case, the respondent workman was a
permanent employee who was dismissed with immediate effect. No
procedure was followed. In view thereof, the award of
reinstatement with 25% back wages is just and proper. No
interference is called for. The Special Civil Application is dismissed.
Rule is discharged.
8. In view of dismissal of the present Special Civil
Application, the petitioner is directed to pay 25% back wages to the
respondent workman within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of this order.
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
cmk
