[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Panchabhai Ramabhai Gangani vs State Of Gujarat on 1 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16297 of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
=============================================
PANCHABHAI RAMABHAI GANGANI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/
REPRESTENTATIVES for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR NILESH M SHAH(780) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5
MS. FORUM J. SHAH, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 01/12/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Ms.
R.R.Gautam for learned advocate Mr. H.S.Munshaw for
respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 as also learned AGP Ms. Forum J.
Shah for respondent No.1, waive service of notice of rule for
respective respondents.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
respective parties, the present matter is taken up for hearing.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nilesh Shah for the
petitioner, learned advocate Ms. R.R.Gautam for learned
advocate Mr. H.S.Munshaw for respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 as
also learned AGP Ms. Forum J. Shah for respondent No.1, at
length.
4. The present writ petition is filed under Articles 14,
16 and 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following
reliefs;
"(A) to issue writ of certiorari and/or any other writ or writs or orders or
directions.
(B) to direct the Respondents to give the benefits or Resolution dt.17-10-88,
Ann-G to the Petitioner with effect from 01-01-90 notionally up to 30-05-06
and further be pleased to direct the Respondents to give difference of salary
from 01-06-06 onwards till its actual implementation.
(C) during the pendency of this petition by way of interim relief to direct the
Respondents to consider the notice of the Petitioner, Annexure-E for giving
benefit of Resolution dt.17-10-88, Annexure-G from 01-01-90.
(D) to grant any other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit in the
interest of justice.
(E) to allow this petition with costs."
5. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Shah appearing
for the petitioner would state that issue germane in the
matter is squarely covered by the decision dated 31.01.2022
of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Special Civil
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
Application No.131 of 2019 (in the case of Thakarshibhai
amarshibhai Chauhan Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.) with
Special Civil Application No.1403 of 2019, confirmed by the
Division Bench vide its judgment and order dated 02.05.2025
passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.226 of 2022 and others
allied matters, whereby, similarly situated persons like the
petitioner, given benefits, as prayed in this present petition.
6. Since the aforesaid facts and the judgments / orders
passed by the Coordinate Bench, confirmed by the Division
Bench, are not disputed by the learned advocates appearing
for the respondents, it needs not to discuss in detail the facts,
when this Court also inclines to pass similar such judgment /
order in this matter, but only few facts require to be observed,
which are as follows;
6.1. The original petitioner - deceased Panchabhai
(hereinafter referred to as 'original petitioner') was appointed
as daily wager with respondent No.4 in the year 1985, whose
services were terminated abruptly by respondent No.4 along
with others on 27.12.1990. So, original petitioner along with
others raised Industrial Dispute being Reference Case (LCS)
No.73 of 1994, which came to be decided by the Labour
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
Court, Surendranagar in favour of original petitioner, vide its
judgment and award dated 30.05.2006, whereby original
petitioner and other similarly situated have been ordered to
reinstate them in their respective services.
6.2. The aforesaid judgment and award passed by the
Labour Court came to be challenged by the respondents
concerned before this Court by way of Special Civil
Application Nos.16424 of 2007 and 30390 of 2007. It appears
from the record that such judgment / award is confirmed up to
Division Bench of this Court, having dismissed the Letters
Patent Appeal Nos. 2012 of 2009 & 2018 of 2009, vide its
judgment and order dated 22.12.2009.
6.3. The original petitioner having not granted the
benefits as per the aforesaid judgment and award passed by
the Labour Court, inasmuch as, not granted wages from the
date of award till his actual reinstatement, then preferred a
writ petition being Special Civil Application No.920 of 2011,
which also came to be allowed in favour of the original
petitioner and ors., by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide judgment and order dated 23.03.2011, in the said
petition.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
6.4. It further appears that previous service rendered
by the original petitioner was not taken into account when
reinstated in the service, by way of impugned communication
dated 21.04.2015, original petitioner along with others
treated to have been in service only from 16.03.2010 i.e. when
actually reinstated. This impugned decision/action of
respondents challenged by the respective parties along with
the original petitioner herein, as according to them, the same
not passed in consonance with Government Resolution dated
17.10.1988.
6.5. As observed hereinabove, in case of other
employees who also reinstated in the service as per the
aforesaid judgment and award passed by the Labour Court,
their respective writ petitions being Special Civil Application
No.131 of 2019 and Special Civil Application No.1403 of 2019,
came to be allowed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 31.01.2022 and so also, confirmed by the
Division Bench while dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal
No.226 of 2022 & Letters Patent Appeal No.546 of 2022 and
others allied matters respectively, vide its judgment and order
dated 02.05.2025.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
6.6. Thus, in view of the aforesaid judgments / orders
passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, confirmed by the Division
Bench, all the benefits emanating from G.R. dated 17.10.1988
given to other similarly situated persons, requires to be given
to original petitioner as well.
7. At this stage, learned advocate Mr. Shah pointed out
that other similar such orders passed by the Co-ordinate
Bench / Division Bench of this Court and also confirmed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court, which are as follows;
i. Special Civil Application No.18154 of 2015, decision
dated 22/12/2016, confirmed in Letters Patent Appeal
No.485 of 2017 dated 20/07/2021, also confirmed in
SLP (C) No.2116 of 2022, dismissing the SLP vide
order dated 22.01.2024;
ii. Special Civil Application Nos.20894 of 2017 & 21570
of 2017, decided on 06.03.2020, confirmed in Letters
Patent Appeal No.663 of 2020 in Special Civil
Application No.20894 of 2017 vide order dated
06.02.2024 and confirmed on 13.02.2024 in Letters
Patent Appeal No.722 of 2020 in Special Civil
Application No.21570 of 2017;
iii. Gurpreet Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. reported in
(2002) 9 SCC 492;
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
iv. Nandkishore Shravan Ahirrao Vs. Kosan Industries
(P) Ltd., rendered in Civil Appeal Nos.201-202 of 2020
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.30469-30470 of 2015),
reported in AIR 2020 SC 1776.
8. By placing reliance upon the aforesaid judgments /
orders passed by this Court, confirmed up to the Hon'ble Apex
Court and other two decisions in the case of Gurpreet Singh
(supra) and Nandkishore Shravan Ahirrao (supra), Mr.
Shah would respectfully submit that as per the settled legal
position of law, when Labour Court granted relief of
reinstating the applicant / original petitioner, even if not
specifically observed about the continuity of her service, it is
deemed to have been granted, thus, it cannot be ignored by
employer when reinstated original petitioner.
8.1. It is respectfully submitted that even though
Labour Court has not in clear terms observed in its judgment /
award that reinstatement of original petitioner with continuity
of service, as per the aforesaid pronouncement of law by
highest Court of India, it requires to be considered by the
respondents, inasmuch as, when there is an award of
reinstatement by the Labour Court, such award has to be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
construed to be an award granting continuity of service unless
otherwise expressly denied.
9. Per contra, learned advocate Ms. R.R.Gautam for
learned advocate Mr. H.S.Munshaw for respondent Nos.2, 3 &
4 so also learned Asst. Government Pleader Ms. Forum J.
Shah for respondent Nos.1, though placed reliance upon the
judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of this
Court dated 12.07.2016 passed in Letters Patent Appeal
No.492 of 2016 in R/ Special Civil Application No.20577 of
2015, are unable to countenance the submissions made by the
learned advocate Mr. Shah for the original petitioner.
10. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
parties and after going through all the aforementioned cited
judgments / orders passed by this Court and so also, by
Hon'ble Apex Court, it is clear like a day that whenever there
is an award passed by the Labour Court, whereby services of
labourer concerned is ordered to be reinstated without
expressing anything about his/her continuity of service, unless
it is expressly denied by Labour Court, continuity of service is
deemed to have been granted in such award. Thus, in view of
aforesaid pronouncement of law, respondents require to
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
consider continuity of service of original petitioner herein
though not expressed observed by Labour Court in its
aforesaid award, thereby requires to grant benefits to the
original petitioner / applicant concerned.
11. It is not in dispute that case of the original petitioner
is so similar and governed by the decision of the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of Thakarshibhai
Amarshibhai Chauhan (supra), which came to be confirmed
by the Division Bench while dismissing the R/Letters Patent
Appeal No.226 of 2022 and allied matters, on 02.05.2025,
thus, there is no reason to take departure from such orders /
judgments which otherwise binding to this Court.
12. In view of the foregoing observations and reasons, the
present writ petition requires to be allowed, which is hereby
allowed.
12.1. Consequently, the impugned communication dated
21.04.2015 passed by respondent No.4 to the extent of not
granting benefits to petitioner of G.R. dated 17.10.1988 from
1.1.1990 and to the extent of stating his appointment w.e.f.
from dated 16.03.2010 is hereby quashed and set aside by
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
holding that the same is arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India and so also passed contrary to law laid
down by this Court / Hon'ble Apex Court as aforesaid.
12.2. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to give
all the consequential benefits of G.R. dated 17.10.1988 to the
original petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.1990 notionally up to 30.05.2006
and further directed to give difference of salary from
01.06.2006 to 12.03.2020.
12.3. It is reported to this Court that original petitioner
having expired on 12.03.2020, respondents are directed to
grant retirement benefits like gratuity and leave encashment
to the petitioners on the basis of considering 32 years of
continuous service of the original petitioner including family
pension starting from 13.03.2020.
12.4. Let respondents calculate and pay all these
aforesaid benefits including its arrears to legal heirs of
original petitioner on or before 31 st January, 2026, failing
which, petitioner herein is entitled to receive such arrears
amount with 9% interest from 01st February, 2026 till its
realization. It is also open for petitioner to initiate contempt
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16297/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/12/2025
undefined
proceeding against erring officials of respondents for not
complying with aforesaid direction in time
12.5. In view of the foregoing conclusion, the present
writ petition is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule
made absolute. At present no costs.
Sd/-
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Lalji Desai
