Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Jivabhai Karabhai Dasa on 2 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12161/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12161 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Versus
JIVABHAI KARABHAI DASA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS FORUM BIMAL SUKHADWALA, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 02/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India challenging the award dated
01.07.2023 passed by the learned Labour Court in
Reference (T) No.36 of 2022, whereby the petitioner
has been directed to reinstate the respondent with
continuity of service but without back wages.
2. It is the case of the petitioner before this Court that
the respondent joined the petitioner as a daily wager
on 01.06.2011 and continued to serve until
31.12.2015. Since the scheme under which
respondent No.1 was engaged as a daily wager was
discontinued in the year 2016, his services came to
be terminated after issuance of one month's notice
dated 30.11.2015 on account of non-availability of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12161/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
work under the said scheme. It is the further case of
the petitioner that during the period from 2011 to
2015, the respondent had neither completed five
years of continuous service nor had he worked for
240 days in the preceding year from the date of
termination. Accordingly, though notice was issued,
retrenchment compensation was not paid.
Challenging the termination of his services, the
respondent instituted proceedings before this Court
by filing Special Civil Application No.20696 of 2015
and Special Civil Application No.1477 of 2018.
3. This Court, vide order dated 16.02.2022, permitted
withdrawal of Special Civil Application No.1477 of
2018 with liberty to raise an industrial dispute before
the competent forum, while clarifying that the period
spent in prosecuting the said petition may be
considered while deciding the industrial dispute. The
learned Labour Court, upon appreciation of the
evidence on record, has granted the relief of
reinstatement with continuity of service, while
declining the claim for back wages. Aggrieved by the
said award, the petitioner has preferred the present
petition.
4. Heard the learned AGP Ms.Forum Bimal Sukhadwala
for the petitioner.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12161/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
5. Learned AGP, Ms. Sukhadwala, submits that the
termination of the respondent was effected after
following due procedure of law, inasmuch as one
month's prior notice was issued before discontinuing
his services. It is further submitted that since the
respondent was engaged as a daily wager and had
not completed 240 days of service in the preceding
year, he was not entitled to the protection under
Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Learned
AGP, Ms. Sukhadwala, contends that the learned
Labour Court, while discarding the documentary
evidence produced by the petitioner, more
particularly the Tarij Patrak and the attendance
sheet, has erroneously passed the impugned award.
Hence, the same warrants interference and this
petition deserves to be allowed.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the
learned AGP for the petitioner, it emerges from the
record that the relationship of employer and
employee is not in dispute, as it is admitted by the
petitioner in the memo of petition as well as before
the learned Labour Court that the respondent had
joined service with the petitioner on 01.06.2011 and
continued up to 31.12.2015. The only contention
raised before this Court pertains to the completion of
240 days in the preceding year. However, such
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12161/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/09/2025
undefined
contention stands falsified from the evidence of the
petitioner's own witness, who in his deposition
admitted that the respondent had worked for more
than 240 days in the year preceding the date of
termination. It is also admitted by the witness
examined at Exhibit 16 that the respondent had
continuously served from 01.06.2011 to 31.12.2015.
The Tarij Patrak and attendance sheet relied upon by
the learned AGP stand contradicted by the
categorical admission of the petitioner's witness.
Admittedly, the services of the respondent were
terminated without payment of retrenchment
compensation. Therefore, the learned Labour Court is
justified in passing the award directing reinstatement
with continuity of service.
7. Considering the delay of five years, the learned
Labour Court has rightly declined to grant the
benefits of back wages. In the considered opinion of
this Court, no error can be said to have been
committed by the learned Labour Court in passing
the impugned award. The petition, being devoid of
merits, deserves to be dismissed.
8. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
M.M.MIRZA
