Gujarat High Court
Chamar Prabhuram Shantilal vs Murugappa Morgan Thermal Ceramic Ltd on 25 August, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1630/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1630 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/8877/2024
==========================================================
CHAMAR PRABHURAM SHANTILAL
Versus
MURUGAPPA MORGAN THERMAL CERAMIC LTD. & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR UT MISHRA(3605) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR PALAK H THAKKAR(3455) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 25/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. By way of the present appeal, the appellant seeks to quash
and set aside the order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the learned
Single Judge, whereby the captioned writ petition filed by the
appellant challenging the award dated 14.10.2023 passed by the
Labour Court, Kalol in Reference T.(LCK) Case No. 27 of 2019,
came to be dismissed. By the said award, the Labour Court had
rejected the reference proceedings emanating from the termination
of the appellant from his services.
2. The short facts recorded by the learned Single Judge in the
writ petition which are not in dispute, read as under:
"2. The short facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner was
initially appointed in the services of the respondent on 13.12.2017 and
continuously worked with the respondent and completed more than 240 days
calendar year.
2.1 The petitioner has been served with a show-cause notice dated
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1630/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
27.11.2018, to which the petitioner has submitted detailed reply and thereafter,
the respondent management has decided to hold inquiry and ultimately the
inquiry was conducted against the petitioner. The services of the petitioner came
to be terminated on the ground that petitioner has committed misconduct by
suppressing material aspects.
2.2 Thereafter, the petitioner raised industrial dispute which was registered as
Ref.(LCK) No. 27 of 2019. Thereafter, the Labour Court heard both the sides and
passed impugned Award dated 14.10.2023 in Reference T.(L.C) Case No. 27 of
2019 by which the reference came to be rejected.
2.3 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Award dated 14.10.2023, in
Ref. (LCK) No. 27 of 2019, the petitioner has filed present petition with above
referred prayer."
3. Learned advocate Mr.U.T Mishra appearing for the appellant,
at the outset, while placing reliance on the affidavit dated
11.12.2024, has submitted that the documents of the erstwhile
employer, Ford India Private Ltd, would establish that the
appellant was a full time employee and was a Team Member of
Ford Motors Private Ltd. It is therefore, contended that the
respondent fell in error in terminating the services of the appellant,
on the premises that he had filled incorrect details about his earlier
employment. Learned advocate Mr. Mishra has pointed out the
appointment order of the appellant in Ford India Private Ltd. and
further orders when he was sent on training. It is submitted that in
fact all these documents were provided to some service provider
and accordingly, who in turn, has filed the details in the application
form. It is thus submitted that the appellant cannot be blamed for
incorporating or mentioning himself as a Team Member in the
application form. Thus, it is urged that the order dated 02.07.2024
passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the award dated
14.10.2023 passed by the Labour Court may be set aside.
4. Per Contra, learned advocate Mr. Palak H. Thakkar, while
placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case
of A.P Public Service Commission Vs. Koneti Venkateswarulu and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1630/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
Ors in 2005 (7) SCC 177, has submitted that the appellant has
falsely made a declaration in the application that he was employed
as a Team Member in Ford India Private Ltd, and upon information
received, an appropriate inquiry was held and the appellant was
given full opportunity by the respondent- Company and upon
holding the inquiry, the appellant was terminated. It is further,
submitted that the legality and validity of the inquiry proceedings
are not challenged by the appellant neither before the Labour
Court nor before the learned Single Judge. Thus, it is urged that
the appeal may be dismissed.
5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties.
6. The termination of the appellant stems out of a false
declaration made by him in his application form to the extent that
he was employed as a Team Member in Ford Motor Private Ltd,
from the period between 13.10.2014 to 31.10.2017. On coming to
know that such information was incorrect, the respondent-
Company undertook necessary exercise and held departmental
inquiry, in which, the appellant had participated and ultimately, he
was terminated from services for making a false speculation in the
appointment order. It is not in dispute that the appellant has not
assailed the validity and legality of the departmental proceedings
held against him. The Labour Court had ultimately, rejected the
reference proceedings being Reference T. (LCK) Case No. 27 of
2019, questioning the termination of the appellant. The learned
Single Judge has also rejected the writ petition filed by the
appellant.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1630/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
7. At this stage, it would be apposite to refer to the conditions,
which were incorporated in the application form made by the
appellant seeking appointment. Condition no. 1 to 3 are as under:
"1. I confirm and certify that the information furnished by me in the
application form in pertinence to my employment is factually correct,
complete and accurate.
2. I understand that if any information provided by me with respect to my
application for employment is found to be untrue, inaccurate or
misleading, MURUGAPPA MORGAN THERMAL CERAMICS Limited
may withdraw any offer of employment made to me or terminate my
EMPLOYMENT, I have already joined MMTCL without prior notice.
3. I understand that all the details provided in this application a subject
to verification."
7.1 Thus, the appellant is bound by the conditions of the
application form and it is specifically provided that in case, any
information is found to be inaccurate / misleading or untrue, it
would be within the domain of the respondent - Company to
withdraw any offer of employment or to terminate him from the
employment.
8. The learned advocate for the appellant in support of his
submissions, has placed some documents relating to the
appointment of the appellant, in Ford India Pvt. Ltd. Upon perusal
of such documents, we find that the same do not reveal that the
appellant was either a permanent employee or an employee on
contractual basis for Ford India Private Ltd, that too as a Team
Member, which he has incorporated in the application form. It is
also noticed by this Court that the appellant was only a stipend
trainee in Ford India Pvt. Ltd, and he has also not completed the
training and was not a confirmed employee of Ford India Private
Ltd, as no confirmation order has been produced either before the
Labour Court or before us.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1630/2024 ORDER DATED: 25/08/2025
undefined
9. Hence, we do not find any illegality or perversity either in
the order passed by the Labour Court or in the order of the learned
Single Judge. Moreover, while sitting in appeal, we cannot delve
into the factual aspects, more particularly, when the appellant has
not assailed the legality and validity of the departmental
proceedings.
10. Accordingly, the present Letters Patent Appeal stands
dismissed.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
Radhika/15
