Gujarat High Court
Amreli District Panchayat vs Vinodbhai Durlabhji Jani on 10 January, 2024
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1430/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1430 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4889 of 2008
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1430 of 2023
==========================================================
AMRELI DISTRICT PANCHAYAT
Versus
VINODBHAI DURLABHJI JANI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR TR MISHRA(483) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Date : 10/01/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Mr.H.S.Munshaw for the
appellant Amreli District Panchayat and learned advocate
Mr.T.R.Mishra for the respondent.
2. This Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent is directed against judgment and order dated
3.10.2022 of learned single Judge. Thereby, learned single
Judge modified the judgment and award of the labour court
which was under challenge before him by awarding lump-sum
compensation of Rs.4 lakhs to the respondent. Furthermore, it
was held that the respondent would be entitled to the benefits
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1430/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2024
undefined
flowing from State Government's Resolution dated 17.10.1988
in relation to the pension and retirement benefits payable to
the respondent.
3. The facts inter alia are that the respondent was engaged
in Veterinary Dispensary at Village Vavera District Amreli on
part-time basis with effect from 29.11.1980 till 1.11.1986. It
was on the ground of non-availability of the funds that the
respondent was relieved from service on 1.11.1986. In the
Reference proceedings (LCB) No.73 of 1993 (Old No.61 of
1987) the Labour Court, Bhavnagar passed award dated
27.9.1995 granting reinstatement without backwages.
3.1 Upon reinstatement in service, in the year 1996, the
workman filed another Reference (LCV) No.6 of 1999 before
the Labour Court, Amreli seeking regularization as Peon from
the date of initial appointment with effect from 29.11.1980.
Further praying for payment of arrears of consequential
benefits. The said Reference was allowed on 26.9.2007. The
labour court directed the appellant -employer to treat the
period commencing from 29.11.1980 to be notional and to
grant all benefits from 13.4.1998 onwards as regular and
permanent employee.
3.2 The aforementioned judgment and award of the labour
court came to be challenged by filing Special Civil Application
which culminated into impugned judgment and order of
learned single Judge. It was one of the contention before
learned single Judge that the respondent was part-timer
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1430/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2024
undefined
whose working hours were fixed and therefore benefits of
Resolution dated 17.10.1988 cannot be extended to him.
Learned single Judge recorded the findings that the said
contention cannot be accepted since the issue before the
labour court in the previous round of litigation being
Reference (LCB) No.71 of 1993, wherein the order was passed
on 25.2.1995 directing the reinstatement of workman with
continuity of service and that accordingly since 1996 to 2019
the respondent has been discharging his services.
3.3 The following was rightly reasoned by learned single
Judge in para 8 of the impugned order.
"Insofar as submission of learned Advocate for the
petitioner that the respondent- workman was part-
timer as his working hours were fixed, it would be
appropriate to refer to order dated 24.11.1980,
which was approving appointment of the respondent-
workman to work for a period of 8 hours and the
award of the Labour Court in the previous round of
litigation in Reference (LCB) No.71 of 1993 for
reinstatement on the original post. Therefore, action
of the petitioner in thereafter changing working
hours is not in consonance with the award of the
Labour Court. "
3.4 During the pendency of the Special Civil Application, the
respondent retired with effect from 30.4.2019. It was
concluded thus that from 1996 to 2019 the respondent
discharged his duties as Peon. As per the judgment and award
of the labour court, he was granted continuity of service.
3.5 It was in light of all the above aspects that when the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1430/2023 ORDER DATED: 10/01/2024
undefined
respondent had attained the age of superannuation on
30.4.2019, lump-sum compensation of Rs.4 lakhs was awarded
by learned single Judge. In view of continuity of service and
actual discharge of duties from 1996 till the date of
retirement that is 30.4.2019, the respondent was treated as to
be entitled for the benefits under Resolution dated 17.10.1988
to the extended while calculating the benefits under
retirement.
4. In course of the hearing, it was also stated that the
authorities have already paid to the respondent the benefits
flowing from Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and pension has
also been granted.
5. This court is in agreement with the findings recorded,
the conclusion reached and the directions issued by learned
single Judge allowing the Special Civil Application.
6. No case is made out to interfere in the Letters Patent
jurisdiction. The Appeal is not liable to be entertained.
7. The Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the Appeal, the Civil Application
will not survive. It is accordingly disposed of.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J)
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
Manshi
