Gujarat High Court
Jetpur Navagadh Municipality vs Labhuben Bhagwanjibhai ... on 2 March, 2023
Bench: Sandeep N. Bhatt
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17941 of 2021
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17941 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18336 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18440 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17944 of 2021
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17944 of 2021
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1794 of 2022
==========================================================
JETPUR NAVAGADH MUNICIPALITY
Versus
LABHUBEN BHAGWANJIBHAI GANGADIYA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.17941 OF 2021:
MR RR TRIVEDI for the Petitioner-Municipality
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner - Municipality
MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Respondents - Workmen
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.18440 OF 2021:
MR RR TRIVEDI for the Petitioner-Municipality
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner - Municipality
MR PANKAJ R DESAI for the Respondents - Workmen
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.18336 OF 2021:
MR RR TRIVEDI for the Petitioner-Municipality
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner - Municipality
MR PANKAJ R DESAI for the Respondents - Workmen
MR HEMAL SHAH for the Respondents-Workmen
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.17944 OF 2021:
MR RR TRIVEDI for the Petitioner-Municipality
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner - Municipality
MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Respondents - Workmen
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1794 OF 2022:
MR RR TRIVEDI for the Petitioner-Municipality
Page 1 of 12
Downloaded on : Tue Mar 07 20:33:53 IST 2023
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner - Municipality
MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Respondents - Workmen
=========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 02/03/2023
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. All these petitions are filed against the
judgment and award of the Labour Court, reinstating the
respondents - workmen, with continuity of service, but
with / without back wages.
2. As the issue involved in all these petitions is
common, with consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, the same are being disposed of by this
common order.
3. The facts of each petition are mentioned as under:
Special Civil Application No.17941 of 2021:
The respondent herein was working as a labourer
in the PWD department of the petitioner-municipality.
Her services were terminated on 1.8.2015 after about
serving for ten years. Her last drawn wages were
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
Rs.286/- per day. On her termination, a Reference was
made to the Labour Court, which was numbered as
Reference (LCR) No.135 of 2015, in which the impugned
order dated 18.8.2021 was passed granting reinstatement
with continuity of service, but without back wages, which
gave rise to this petition.
Special Civil Application No.18440 of 2021:
The respondent herein was working as a labourer
in the PWD department of the petitioner-municipality.
His services were terminated on 1.8.2015 after about
serving for six years. His last drawn wages were
Rs.286/- per day. On his termination, a Reference was
made to the Labour Court, which was numbered as
Reference (LCR) No.148 of 2015, in which the impugned
order dated 4.12.2019 was passed granting reinstatement
with continuity of service and with 20% back wages,
which gave rise to this petition.
Special Civil Application No.18336 of 2020:
The respondent herein was working as a labourer
in the PWD department of the petitioner-municipality.
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
Her services were terminated on 1.8.2015 though she
was serving since 1998. Her last drawn wages were
Rs.286/- per day. On her termination, a Reference was
made to the Labour Court, which was numbered as
Reference (LCR) No.162 of 2015, in which the impugned
order dated 4.12.2019 was passed granting reinstatement
with continuity of service and with 20% back wages,
which gave rise to this petition.
Special Civil Application No.17944 of 2021:
The respondent herein was working as a labourer
in the PWD department of the petitioner-municipality.
His services were terminated on 1.8.2015 after about
serving for fourteen years. His last drawn wages were
Rs.286/- per day. On his termination, a Reference was
made to the Labour Court, which was numbered as
Reference (LCR) No.134 of 2015, in which the impugned
order dated 18.8.2021 was passed granting reinstatement
with continuity of service, but without back wages, which
gave rise to this petition.
Special Civil Application No.1794 of 2022:
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
The respondent herein was working as a labourer
in the PWD department of the petitioner-municipality.
His services were terminated on 1.8.2015 after about
serving for nine years. Her last drawn wages were
Rs.286/- per day. On his termination, a Reference was
made to the Labour Court, which was numbered as
Reference (LCR) No.136 of 2015, in which the impugned
order dated 12.10.2021 was passed granting reinstatement
with continuity of service, but without back wages, which
gave rise to this petition.
4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
4.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted
that the Labour Court has erred in passing the
impugned award/s on the basis of the finding of violation
of Sections 25F, 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes
Act, 1947 ('the I.D. Act' for short). He submitted that
since the work was taken by outsourcing, there is no
work at present in the municipality which can be offered
to the respondents - workmen. Therefore, there is no
violation of Section 25G of the I.D. Act.
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
4.2 He submitted that there is no post of labourer in
the regular set-up of the municipality and therefore the
respondents cannot be reinstated in service.
4.3 He further submitted that the respondents have not
proved that they completed 240 days of continuous
service in a year and therefore, there is no violation of
Section 25F of the I.D.Act.
4.4 He further submitted that there is no fresh
appointment made in the municipality for the said post
on which the respondents were working and therefore
there is no violation of Section 25H of the I.D.Act.
4.5 Learned advocate for the petitioner thus submitted
that when there is no violation of any provisions of the
I.D.Act, the impugned award is not tenable and therefore
needs to be quashed.
4.6 He fairly submitted that in the alternatively, lump-
sum compensation can be awarded to the respondents
workmen in lieu of the reinstatement, backwages and
continuity of service.
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
4.7 In support of his submissions, he relied on the
following decisions:
1) 2021 Scale 10 page 271 - Ranbir Singh V/s Executive
Eng.P.W.D.
2) 2022-JX(Guj)-0-27 - Mansukhbhai Popatlal Vaghela V/s
General Manager - State Bank of India.
5.1 Per contra, learned advocate appearing for the
respondents - workmen has supported the impugned
award/s passed by the Labour Court. She submitted that
the Labour Court has categorically come to the
conclusion that there is a violation of the provisions of
Sections 25(F), 25(G) and 25(H) of the I.D. Act and
therefore, has granted reinstatement with continuity of
service. This finding, arrived at by the Labour Court,
was after considering the fact that the respondents were
working for more than 240 days continuously and that
too for more than six years with the petitioner
municipality, and that though they were working on the
regular posts, they were terminated suddenly and other
employees were given work on contractual basis. She
submitted that it shows that there was work of
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
labourers with the municipality. It is, therefore,
submitted that the impugned award/s of the Labour
Court are just and proper and interference need not be
made in the impugned awards.
5.2 In support of the submissions, the following
decisions are relied upon:
1) 2021(1) CLR 325 - Junagadh Municipal Corporation
V/s Dipakbhai Pratapbhai Karmata
2) 2020 JX (Guj) 644 - State of Gujarat V/s Manharbhai
Hemabhai Bariya
3) 2022 JX (Guj) 804 - State of Gujarat V/s Ashokbhai
Kanabhai Parmar
4) 2022 JX (Guj) 677 - Rameshbhai Bhatibhai Pagi V/s
Deputy Executive Engineer
5) 2016(1) LLH 93 - Executive Engineer, Gujarat Water
Supply and Sewerage V/s Keyur Shankarlal Vyas
6) 2016(1) CLR 188 - Gujarat State Civil Supplies
Corporation Limited V/s Nazirbhai S/o Dhanabhai Mir
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
5.3 However, learned advocates for the respondents
workmen have also fairly submitted for alternative
submission made by the learned advocate for the
petitioner municipality that in lieu of the award/s of the
Labour Court, if appropriate lump-sum compensation is
awarded, that would suffice the purpose in facts of the
present case as there is no such post of `topla padia' in
the set up of Municipality in existence.
6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused
the material on record. It transpires from the record that
on one hand, there is a fact that all the respondents
have worked for more than 240 days continuous service
and that too for more than six years with the petitioner
municipality and suddenly, they have been terminated
and on the other hand, there is another fact that there
is no post of labourer in the regular set-up of the
municipality where the respondents workmen can be
reinstated / accommodated. Thus, this Cout is of the
view that in view of the above fact situation, without
entering into the further merits of the matter, if lump-
sum compensation is awarded to the respondents
workmen in lieu of the award passed by the Labour
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
Court, then the ends of justice would be met.
7. At this juncture, a reference deserves to be made to
the recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of
Pravinbhai Nanjibhai Bharadava V/s The State of
Gujarat, in Civil Appeal No.221 of 2023 dated 9.1.2023
relied on by the learned advocate appearing for
respondents workmen, wherein the Apex Court was
considering similar fact situation and came to the
conclusion that interest of justice would be met if the
lump-sum amount of compensation is awarded.
8. It is also relevant to reproduce relevant paragraphs
of order passed in Special Civil Application No.2711 of
2023 and allied matters on 23.2.2023, which read as
under:
"3. Considering the submissions made by learned Advocate
Mr.Joshi, it would appear that in case of similarly situated
persons, whose reference had been rejected by the learned
Labour Court on the ground of delay and which decision
had been upheld by learned Single Judge, the learned
Division Bench relying upon decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in case of B.S.N.L. vs Bhurumal reported in 2014(7)
SCC page No.177 had directed grant of compensation at the
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
rate of Rs.50,000/- to the appellants therein.
3.1 It also appears that relying upon the law laid
down by the Hon'ble Division Bench, a learned Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.4630 of
2022 and allied matters had directed grant of compensation
at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per year of service. It would also
appear that while the petitioners of Special Civil Application
No.2711 of 2023 and Special Civil Application No.2712 of
2023 have put in 4 years of service, petitioner of SCA
No.2776 of 2023 has put in 5 years of service."
9. In view of the above and considering the nature of
work done by respondents-workmen, the following order
is passed.
9.1 All these petitions are partly allowed.
9.2 The impugned awards stand modified to the extent
the petitioner municipality shall pay a lump-sum
compensation in lieu of the award passed by learned
trial Court, as per the table below to the respondents
workmen of each petition.
C/SCA/17941/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/03/2023
SPECIAL CIVIL NAME OF WORKMAN AMOUNT
APPLICATION NO.
17941 OF 2021 Labhuben Rs.2,50,000/-
Bhagwanjibhai Gangadi
18440 of 2021 Jayantibhai Bhupatbhai Rs.1,50,000/-
Jadav
18336 of 2021 Shree Gitaben Kantilal Rs.4,25,000/-
Bagda
17944 of 2021 Pathan Yunuskhan Rs.3,50,000/-
Kanyalkhan
1794 of 2022 Sitapara Sanjay Rs.2,25,000/-
Kanubhai
9.3 All these petitions are disposed of accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the main petitions, civil
applications does not survive and they are disposed of
accordingly.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
