Gujarat High Court
Taluka Development Officer vs Jilubhai Rupsangbha Mori on 18 June, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2737 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK 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 ?
================================================================
TALUKA DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ANR.
Versus
JILUBHAI RUPSANGBHA MORI & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR NILESH M SHAH(780) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR PARITOSH CALLA(2972) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No.
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 18/06/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present petition is filed by the petitioners under
Articles 14, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
seeking below mentioned relief/s:-
"(A) Be pleased to admit the present Special Civil
Application.
(B) Be pleased to allow this Special Civil Application by
way of passing appropriate orders, writ, mandamus or
directions quashing and setting aside the award dated
17.12.11 passed by the Presiding Officer, Hon'ble
Labour Court at Surendranagar in Reference [LCS]
No.102/05 ordering compensation of Rs.50,000/- in lieu
of reinstatement annexed as ANNEXURE-G in the
interest of justice.
(C) Pending the admission, final hearing and disposal of
the present Special Civil Application be pleased to stay
the implementation, execution & operation of the award
dated 17.12.11 passed by the Presiding Officer, Hon'ble
Labour Court at Surendranagar in Reference [LCS]
No.102/05 ordering compensation of Rs.50,000/- in lieu
of reinstatement annexed as ANNEXURE-G in the
interest of justice.
(D) Be pleased to call for the record of case bearing
Reference [LCS] No.102/05 from Hon'ble Labour Court
at Surendranagar.
(E) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as
the nature of the case may be required and the
Honourable Court may deem thought fit to pass such
order."
2. The brief facts giving rise to present petition are that
the respondent no.1 was provided work as a daily wage
Driver depending upon the availability of work by District
Rural Development Agency, Surendranagar between
24.11.2003 to 26.4.2004 and no regular recruitment
procedure was followed at that time. A vehicle bearing
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
registration No. GAN 9594 was entrusted to Lakhtar
Taluka Panchayat by the petitioner no.2 for the smooth
implementation of the schemes entrusted by the District
Rural Development Agency to the Taluka Panchayat. The
respondent. no.1 did not work with the petitioner no.2 on
his own after 26.4.2004. As no regular and permanent
driver was posted at Lakhtar Taluka Panchayat by the
competent authority, petitioner no.1 herein provided
work as a daily wage driver to the respondent No.1
herein and he had worked between 26.4.2004 to 5.1.2005
3. Thereafter, one Mr.N.M.Motka, a regular and
permanent Driver of Surendranagar District Panchayat
was posted in Lakhtar Taluka Panchayat through order
dated 4/5.1.2005 by the competent authority i.e. District
Development Officer and, therefore he reported on
11.1.2005 and hence through an order dated 11.1.2005
the petitioner no.1 herein ordered to discontinue
respondent no.1 as a daily wage driver. Thereafter,
respondent no.1 herein approached the Assistant Labour
Commissioner of Surendranagar for conciliation under
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 but it was
replied that in view of the appointment of the permanent
and regular driver, it was not possible for Taluka
Panchayat to provide work to respondent No.1 as a daily
wage driver.
4. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Labour
Court at Surendranagar by way Ref. [LCS] No.102/05 and
respondent no.1 herein filed a Statement of Claim praying
for reinstatement with continuity of service as well as full
back wages. The petitioners filed detailed written
separate statements before the Labour Court showing the
circumstances under which circumstances respondent
No.1 was appointed and later on terminated. All the
necessary documents and oral evidences were laid before
the Labour Court but ignoring the same the Labour Court
concluded that there was a non-compliance of the
provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 however as a regular and permanent driver is
posted at Lakhtar Taluka Panchayat, it would be just and
proper to award a compensation of Rs.50,000/- in lieu of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
reinstatement to respondent No.1. Hence, the petitioners
have filed present petition seeking above mentioned
relief.
5. Heard Mr. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Shah, learned Counsel for the
respondent.
6. Mr. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the petitioners has
submitted that respondent No.1 was provided work as a
daily wage driver without following due procedure of
recruitment purely on temporary and adhoc basis by
District Rural Development Agency, Surendranagar
through order dated 26.4.2004. He has further submitted
that respondent No.1 was required to drive the said
vehicle depending upon the availability of work and fund
and he was to work up to the appointment of a permanent
and regular driver on the said sanctioned post.
6.1 Mr. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the petitioners
urges before the Court that the impugned award passed
by the Presideint Officer, Labour Court is erroneous,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
illegal and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside
and present petition may be allowed.
7. On the other Mr. Shah, learned Counsel for the
respondent has submitted that the labour Court has not
committed any error in passing the impugned order. He
has further submitted that there is no illegality or
perversity in the impugned order passed by the Labour
Court. He has submitted that after evaluating the
evidence placed on record and after going through the
relevant material available before the labour Court, the
labour Court has passed the impugned award which is
just and proper. He urges before the Court that the
present petition may not be entertained and the same
may be dismissed.
8. I have perused the relevant material placed on
record and the relevant documents. I have also gone
through the impugned order passed by the President
Officer, Labour Court.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
9. It appears that the respondent workman was
appointed purely on temporary basis and the respondent
workman was working as a driver when the regular
driver working with the respondent was on leave.
However, as and when the regular driver working with
the respondent was reported on duty, the service of the
present respondent workman automatically came to an
end. The petitioners have filed their written objection at
Exh.8 before the President Officer, Labour Court. It was
also discussed by the President Officer that the
respondent No.1 was appointed on 26.4.2004 and worked
upto 10.1.2005 on leave vacancy and had worked for 260
days. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court has believed
that so far as the breach of provisions of Section 25F of
the Industrial Disputes Act is concerned, the petitioners
have not complied with the provisions of Section 25F of
the Industrial Disputes Act but for that there was no
discussion at all. So far as the findings recorded by the
Presiding Officer, Labour Court with regard to the
violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
Court has disbelieved the case of respondent workman
however, considering the fact that the respondent
workman had worked for 260 days, Presiding Officer has
partly allowed the impugned award and awarded
Rs.50,000/- towards the lumpsum compensation and
Rs. 2,000/- towards the cost.
10. In view of the above findings recorded by the
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, I am of the opinion that
there was no illegality or irregularity committed by
Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Surendranagar and I do
not find any merits in the matter. The Presiding Officer,
Labour Court has rightly awarded compensation to the
tune of Rs.50,000/- in favour of the respondent workman
and to that extent the petition is required to be allowed.
11. For the foregoing reasons, I am of the view that the
amount of compensation of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the
petitioners before this Court shall be disbursed in favour
of the respondent workman, after due verification and
after verifying the bank details of the respondent
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2737/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
workman, through R.T.G.S. in his bank account and if the
amount of cost of Rs. 2,000/- is not deposited by the
petitioners, the same shall directly be deposited in the
bank account of the respondent workman through
R.T.G.S.. It is clarified that the amount of compensation
of Rs.50,000/- and the amount cost of Rs.2,000/- shall be
paid to the respondent workman after period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
12. With aforesaid clarification, present petition stands
disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
