Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat Through Office Of ... vs Virendrasinh Dalpatsinh Parmar on 7 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4481 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH OFFICE OF ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL
CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
Versus
VIRENDRASINH DALPATSINH PARMAR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 07/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, challenging the award passed by
the learned labour court, Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA)
No.496 of 2015 whereby, the present petitioner was
directed to reinstate the respondent workman without
back wages and with continuity of service.
2. It is the case of the present petitioner that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
respondent herein was working with petitioner
organization as a Rojamdar since 01.12.2006 and
drawing Rs.219/- per month. His services were put an
end to on 25.12.2014 and challenging the said
termination, the reference came to be filed before the
learned reference court which was registered as
Reference (LCA) No.496 of 2015. Learned reference
court after considering the submissions made by both
the parties has awarded the reference in favour of the
respondent on 05.10.2024 which is subject matter of
challenge before this Court.
3. Heard learned AGP Mr.Yuvraj Brahmbhatt for the State,
3.1. Learned AGP Mr.Brahmbhatt submits that the
respondent had not completed 240 days in the year
2006-07, 2008-09 and 2013-14. Learned AGP
Mr.Brahmbhatt submits that in view of the back door
entry and not fulfilling the requirement as per the
recruitment rules, the service of the respondent was
terminated orally. Learned AGP Mr.Brahmbhatt further
states that at the time of terminating the service, one
month notice and retrenchment compensation was paid,
however, without considering the same the impugned
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
award was passed, therefore same is required to be set
aside and the petition is required to be allowed.
4. Having considered the arguments advanced by the
learned AGP Mr.Brahmbhatt, it appears from the record
that as per the claim made by the respondent workman
he was serving with the petitioner department since
01.12.2006 till 25.12.2014. To prove his continuity of
service, in addition of his disclosure in the chief
examination, the application below Exh.6 was filed
seeking production of the relevant documents. In
compliance of the order passed in production
application, the petitioner has produced the muster roll
which is reproduced hereinbelow..........page 41
No. of years in
Sr. Number of
Years of operation(work) which 240 days Remarks
No. days
were completed
2 01/12/2007 to 30/11/2008 203
4 01/12/2009 to 28/10/2010 168
29/10/2010 to 30/11/2010 22
5 01/12/2010 to 30/11/2011 217
6 01/12/2011 to 30/11/2012 152
7 01/12/2012 to 30/11/2013 222.5
9 01/12/2014 to 31/12/2014 20
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
5. Contention raised by the present petitioner that
continuity of service cannot be considered, as he did not
complete 240 days in some of the years. To deal with
that contention the provision of section 25(b) of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is required to be referred
to which is reproduced herein below:-
"25B. Definition of continuous service.
(1) a workman shall be said to be in continuous service for a period if
he is, for that period, in uninterrupted service, including service which
may be interrupted on account of sickness or authorised leave or an
accident or a strike which is not illegal, or a lock-out or a cessation of
work which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman;
(2) where a workman is not in continuous service within the meaning of
clause (1) for a period of one year or six months, he shall be deemed to
be in continuous service under an employer--
(a) for a period of one year, if the workman, during a period of twelve
calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation
is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for not less
than--
(i) one hundred and ninety days in the case of a workman employed
below ground in a mine; and
(ii) two hundred and forty days, in any other case;
(b) for a period of six months, if the workman, during a period of six
calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation
is to be made, has actually worked under the employer for not less
than--
(i) ninety-five days, in the case of a workman employed below ground in
a mine; and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
(ii) one hundred and twenty days, in any other case."
6. As per the above provisions, if the employee has
completed 240 days in a preceding year, then it can be
said that the requirement of section 25(b) is fulfilled. In
the instant case, as per the allegation made in the
statement of claim, services of the respondent was orally
terminated on 25.12.2014 and as per the chart
reproduced hereinabove, the employee has completed
301 days from 2013-14. In that background it cannot be
said that, completion of continuity of service is not done.
7. The another contention is that at the time of
retrenchment, retrenchment compensation is paid
alongwith the notice. The learned reference court has
observed in the impugned award that only contention is
raised that payment of retrenchment compensation is
made, however, on referring to the submissions, it is
observed that the compensation would be deposited in
the account. However, no evidence was adduced to show
that the compensation has been infact paid. Learned
reference court after considering the evidence, more
particularly the muster roll, has awarded the reference
in favour of the respondent by granting the relief of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4481/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
reinstatement without back wages and with continuity of
service. This Court is of the view that no error has been
committed by the learned reference court in passing the
impugned award, therefore, petition deserves to be
dismissed.
8. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
