Botad Nagarpalika vs Rajabsha Akbarsha Zanpadia
2023 Latest Caselaw 7991 Guj

                                                                                   NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/LPA/1319/2023                               JUDGMENT DATED: 01/11/2023

                                                                                    undefined




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                 R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1319 of 2023
              In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8185 of 2013

                                    With
                 CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2023
                In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1319 of 2023

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

==========================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to               NO
      see the judgment ?
2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                           NO

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the          NO
      judgment ?
4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of law          NO
      as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or
      any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
                           BOTAD NAGARPALIKA
                                 Versus
                       RAJABSHA AKBARSHA ZANPADIA
==========================================================
Appearance:
HARSHESH R KAKKAD(7813) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
          and
          HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE

                             Date : 01/11/2023

                             ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/LPA/1319/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/11/2023

undefined

Heard learned advocate Mr. Harshesh R. Kakkad for the

appellant- Nagarpalika and learned advocate Mr. D.G. Shukla for the

respondent-workman.

2. Preferred by the Nagarpalika, this Letters Patent Appeal arises

out of common judgment and order dated 13.09.2022 of learned

Single Judge in so far as the decision relates to Special Civil

Application No. 8185 of 2013. Learned Single Judge directed

Municipality to pay lump sum compensation of Rs.3 Lakhs to the legal

heirs of the deceased employee who died on 22.04.2016. The death

occurred after the deliverance of the award by Industrial Tribunal.

3. The Reference (IT) No.26 of 1998 of the respondent workman,

came to be rejected by the Industrial Tribunal by judgment and order

dated 04.10.2011. The respondent workman was a wireman under first

party employer. The workman filed the statement of claim (Exh.6) and

sought relief for regularization from the date of entry in service and to

extend the resultant service benefits.

4. It was the case that though he was discharging the duties of a

permanent nature, he was kept in service as daily-rated employee by

paying the minimum wages and that thereby the employer deprived

the workman of permanency by indulging into unfair labour practice.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/LPA/1319/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/11/2023

undefined

The first party employer filed its reply ( Exh.9) to take a stand that the

employee was a daily rated workman and was employed depending

upon the availability of work. It was contended that he was not a

regularly selected employee, not entitled to regularization.

4.1 The reference came to be rejected by the Industrial Tribunal

observing inter alia that the workman had entered into service on

08.06.1996 and on 02.08.1997, he obtained ex parte interim stay

against the employer and continued in service. It was this aspect which

weighed with the Industrial Tribunal to dismiss the reference during

the pendency of the petition, the workman died.

5. Reckoned from the date of entry in service, the workman, in any

case, continued to serve the first party employer- theMunicipality for

more than 20 years. As stated above, he died on 22.04.2016 after the

order of the Industrial Tribunal and before the judgment and order of

learned Single Judge.

5.1 Learned Single Judge in paragraph 4.5 of the order noticed the

sanction set up of the Municipality to come to conclusion in paragraph

10 that total 59 posts were vacant and at least 7 posts of peon were

vacant.

5.2 Though the findings were recorded in favour of the workman,

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/LPA/1319/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/11/2023

undefined

there was no question of reinstating him as he had died. Taking note

of the aspect that the workman died after rendering long services,

and taking into account the overall circumstances, Rs.3 Lakhs was

awarded to the legal heirs towards lump sum compensation.

6. The length of service, the nature of post, the status of workman

and time which has elapsed till granting of relief are relevant factors,

on the basis of which the court may advert to grant relief of payment

of lump sum compensation in lieu of the relief of reinstatement.

Noticing facts and relevant factors applied, the court does not find

any error on part of the learned Single Judge to pay to the heirs of the

deceased workman the amount of Rs.3 Lakhs towards compensation.

7. The appeal lacks merit since no error can be booked in the

judgment and order of learned Single Judge. The Letters Patent

Appeal is dismissed.

As the appeal is dismissed, the Civil Application will not survive.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) SUYASH SRIVASTAVA