Gujarat High Court
Chemical Mazdoor Panchayat vs The Chief Engineer (Production) on 2 September, 2024
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/941/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 941 of 2020
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14497 of 2020
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 1 of 2020
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 941 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT 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 ?
=============================================
CHEMICAL MAZDOOR PANCHAYAT
Versus
THE CHIEF ENGINEER (PRODUCTION) & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date : 02/09/2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15
of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the order
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/941/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2024
undefined
passed by the learned Single Judge dated 27.11.2020 rejecting
the writ petition filed by the appellant - Mazdoor Panchayat.
2. The learned Single judge vide order dated 27.11.2020
passed the following order : -
"The Industrial Tribunal has rejected the
reference on the ground that contractor with whom
the employees were working was not joined as
party in the proceedings. Considering the terms
of reference, it is clear that for prayer made
with regard to regularization as permanent
employees of Gujarat Electricity Board, twin
conditions must be satisfied; first being, name
of the workmen must be reflected in the Register
of the contractor and second being, workmen must
be working in the Thermal Power Station,
Gandhinagar. Since contractor is not joined as
party respondent and no documentary evidence is
produced to support the claim that the name of
the workmen reflected in the Register of the
contractor, very terms of reference is not
satisfied and therefore, there is nothing wrong
in rejecting the reference by the Industrial
Tribunal. Hence, this petition cannot be
entertained and it is rejected."
3. Learned advocate Mr.U. T. Mishra, appearing for the
appellant has submitted that the members of the appellant are
still working with the respondent-establishment as contract
labours. It is submitted that the learned Single Judge has
rejected the writ petition by not appreciating the fact that
merely because the contractor is not joined as a party
respondent. It is urged that the present appeal may be allowed
and the order passed by the learned Single Judge may be
quashed and set aside. In the alternative, it is submitted that
liberty may be reserved in favour of the appellant to raise
demand.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/941/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2024
undefined
4. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave, appearing
on behalf of the respondent No.1 has submitted that the
learned Single Judge has appropriately rejected the writ
petition since the contractor is not joined as a party
respondent and no documentary evidence is produced to
support the claim that the names of the workmen reflected in
the register of the contractor. It is submitted that the present
appeal may not be entertained.
5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties. We have also perused the order passed by
the learned Single Judge.
6. The learned Single Judge as well as the Tribunal have
primarily rejected the reference proceedings by observing that
the contractor, under which the workmen of the appellant -
Mazdoor Panchayat are serving, is not made a party
respondent.
7. We have also examined the terms of reference, which
mention that the workmen / members of the appellant -
Mazdoor Panchayat, in fact, were engaged by the contractor
and they were working under them. Thus, when it is the case
of the workmen that they are engaged by the contractor, their
status of working with the respondent cannot be proved.
8. Under the circumstances, we do not find any infirmity or
illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Hence, the present appeal fails. The same is dismissed. The
order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 27.11.2020 is
hereby confirmed.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/941/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2024
undefined
9. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the the appellant
- Chemical Mazdoor Panchayat to raise appropriate demand.
10. It is clarified that the impugned award passed by the
Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad dated 30.11.2019 rejecting the
reference proceedings being Reference (IT) No.259 of 1996
may not be considered detrimental to the interest of the
members of the appellant- Mazdoor Panchayat.
11. If any such demand is raised, the appropriate
Government shall decide the same without being influenced by
the award dated 30.11.2019 passed in the reference
proceedings being Reference (IT) No.259 of 1996. All the
contentions raised by the respective parties are left open. It is
apparent that we have not examined the matter on merits.
12. As a sequel, the connected civil application also stands
disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(MAUNA M. BHATT,J)
MAHESH/40
