Gujarat High Court
Patdi Municipality vs Gautambhai Chanabhai Miyavara on 4 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12282/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12282 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
PATDI MUNICIPALITY
Versus
GAUTAMBHAI CHANABHAI MIYAVARA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DEEPAK P SANCHELA(2696) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 04/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India, challenging the award passed by the
learned Labour Court on 24.02.2025 in Reference (T) LCS No.05
of 2020, whereby the learned Labour Court has granted the relief
of reinstatement without back wages.
2. It is the case of the present petitioner that the dispute was
raised before the learned Reference Court by filing the
statement of claim, alleging that the petitioner - Nagarpalika had
called the applications from the candidates for the post of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12282/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
Drivers and as the respondent was possessing a heavy license,
the respondent applied for the same. After following due
procedure, his appointment was made on the post of Driver on
01.08.2014, at a fixed salary of Rs.3,500/-. The petitioner -
Nagarpalika has also passed a resolution confirming the
appointment of the respondent on 10.12.2014. Thereafter, as
respondent filed a leave application for two months on
15.04.2019. The respondent was informed by the concerned
Chief Officer of the Nagarpalika that he may not come from
tomorrow, raising the dispute of illegal termination. The
reference was filed and the learned Labour Court, after
considering the evidence adduced, awarded the reference in
favor of the respondent by granting the relief which is mentioned
hereinabove, which is the subject matter of challenge before this
Court.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Sanchela for the petitioner.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Sanchela submits that the
appointment of the petitioner was made for a period of 11
months and that was also on fixed pay. Learned advocate Mr.
Sanchela submits that after 15.04.2019, on completion of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12282/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
leave period, the respondent did not report for duty and
therefore, Nagarpalika has engaged another Driver and as on
date, there is no post available with the Nagarpalika. Learned
advocate Mr. Sanchela submits that as the respondent himself
has abandoned the service, he is not entitled to the relief of
reinstatement as granted by the learned Labour Court and
therefore, the impugned award deserves to be set aside and the
present petition is required to be allowed.
5. Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned
advocate Mr. Sanchela and on referring to the reasons assigned
by the learned Labour Court, it emerges that the reference came
to be filed by the respondent claiming that he was serving on the
post of Driver since 01.08.2014. He was getting a monthly wage,
as reflected from the bank statement as well as the wage
register produced below Exh.56. It also emerges from the record
that the respondent filed an application for leave on 15.04.2019,
which was produced below Mark 6/5. Thereafter, it is alleged that
the respondent reported on duty, but he was not permitted to do
so. It is contended by the present petitioner that the respondent
himself has abandoned the duty. However, from the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12282/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
communication, which is addressed on 01.08.2019, produced
below Mark 6/6, it transpires that the respondent tried to resume
duty, but he was not permitted to resume duty. It also emerges
from the record that to substantiate the argument with regard to
the abandonment of the service, no documentary evidence was
placed on record and during the cross-examination of the witness
of the petitioner, it is admitted that no notice was issued, neither
any departmental inquiry was initiated, regarding remaining
unauthorizedly absent or abandoning the service. It is also
admitted that the letter issued by the respondent dated
01.08.2019 remained unreplied and the notice which is produced
below Exh.48 was also not responded. It emerges from overall
the facts that the respondent was terminated from the service
without following due procedure under the Act and therefore,
the learned Court is justified in holding that the termination is
illegal.
6. From the cross-examination of the witness of the
petitioner, it emerges that after the termination of the
respondent, other persons were engaged and therefore, there is
a clear violation of Sections 25 G & H of the Act. The seniority list
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/12282/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
which was sought to be produced by filing the production
application was not produced, neither any explanation was
offered for not producing the same. It is admitted by the witness
of the petitioner that there are 7 Drivers working as on date. The
learned Labour Court, considering the overall circumstances, has
come to the conclusion that there is a violation of Section 25 F, G
& H of the Act and has granted the relief of reinstatement
without back wages.
7. In the considered opinion of this Court, no error has been
committed by the learned Court in granting the said relief.
Therefore, no interference is required. Hence, the present
petition is dismissed.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
Vikramsinh Amarsinh
