Gujarat High Court
Ishwarbhai Becharbhai Vaghela vs Range Forest Officer on 29 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4987 of 2023
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5846 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
ISHWARBHAI BECHARBHAI VAGHELA
Versus
RANGE FOREST OFFICER & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRAKASH G PANDYA(3041) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.HARSH SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 29/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Since all the petitions raise identical questions of law
and fact, they are being disposed of by this common
judgment. For the purpose of convenience, the facts as
set out in Special Civil Application No. 4987 of 2023
have been taken into consideration.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah
waves service of Rule on behalf of respondent.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
3. This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India challenging the award passed by
the learned Labour Court, Nadiad in Reference LCN
No.27 of 2018 dated 30.11.2022 whereby, the Labour
Court has awarded lump sum compensation of
Rs.30,000/- with 9% interest in lieu of reinstatement as
well as back wages.
3.1. It is the case of the present petitioner that the
petitioner was joined as a gardener and working since
01.06.1982 and was getting daily wages of Rs.296/-. On
16.11.1993, the service of the petitioner came to be
terminated which was the subject matter of challenge in
Reference Case No. 126 of 1994 filed before the learned
Labour Court, Nadiad wherein the learned Court has
partly allowed the reference in favour of the petitioner
on 12.12.2008 directing the respondent to reinstate the
petitioner with 20% back wages. The petitioner was
joined and has worked up to June, 2017 and again he
was orally terminated on 15.07.2017 which was again
challenged before the learned labour court by filling
reference being LCN No.27 of 2018 which was again
awarded in favour of the petitioner on 30.11.2022
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
however, learned Court has granted meager amount of
Rs.30,000/- compensation, which is the subject matter of
challenge before this Court.
4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya for the
petitioner and learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah or the State.
4.1. Learning advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya submits that
indisputably the petitioner has worked with the
respondent from 1982 to 1993 and thereafter, from 2009
to 2014. Learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya submits
that though learned Court has believed the continuous
service of the petitioner from 1982 to 15.07.2017
however, has awarded lump sum compensation of
Rs.30,000/-. Learned advocate Mr.Prakash Pandya
submits that the documentary evidence were placed on
record below mark 14/1 by the respondent showing the
attendance of the present petitioner during the aforesaid
period and therefore, instead of granting reasonable
compensation learned Labour Court has awarded
meager amount of Rs.30,000/-. In that background this
petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned order
deserves to be set aside.
4.2. Per contra, learned AGP Mr.Harsh Shah submits that
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
after the petitioner joined with the respondent and after
termination order, the petitioner did not work from 1994
to 2008 due to termination order and thereafter, he was
reinstated pursuant to the award passed by the learned
Labour Court and has worked up to 2014. Learning AGP
Mr.Harsh Shah submits that to establish the claim of
work from 2014 to 2017 no documentary evidence was
placed on record and therefore, learned court is justified
in granting the lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/-
and in that background no interference is required.
5. Having considered the arguments advanced by the
learned advocates for the respective parties and on
referring the reasons assigned by the learned labour
Court it emerges that the learned Labour Court has
awarded the reference in favour of the petitioner by
holding termination illegal. Indisputably, this award is
not challenged by the respondent and has attained
finality. Prior to the termination, the petitioner was
terminated in the year 1994 which was challenged
subject matter of challenge in the Reference case
No.126 of 1994 wherein, the learned Labour Court has
granted relief of reinstatement with 20% back wages.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
The said award was also not challenged by the
respondent and therefore, it attained finality and
pursuant to the award, the service of the petitioner was
reinstated in the year 2009 by the respondent. Again as
per the claim of the petitioner, he served continuously
up to 15.07.2017 and thereafter, the termination was
ordered without following due procedure prescribed
under section 25F of the I.D.Act. Learned Court while
holding the termination illegal, has believed the
continuous service from 1982 to 15.07.2017 in SCA
No.4987 of 2023 and continuously worked from 2001 to
2017 in SCA No. 5846 of 2023. At the end, learned Court
has awarded lump sum compensation of Rs.30,000/- and
Rs.70,000/- respectively, which in the opinion of this
Court is unreasonable and unjustified.
6. This Court has referred the decision rendered by the
Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.908 of 2023
wherein, in an identical situation, this Court has
observed as under:
Thus, while calculating the number of years of services, we
proposed to deduct the number of years service for which there is
delay in preferring reference. After deduction of such number of
service, we propose to give compensation in the following tabular
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4987/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/09/2025
undefined
form:
Sr No. Total no. of years for Amount of lump sum
lump sum compensation compensation
1 5 to 10 years Rs.3.00 lacs
2 10-15 years Rs.5.00 lacs
3 15-20 years Rs.7.5 lacs
7. Considering the above ratio, in the opinion of this Court
the lump sum compensation awarded in both the
references enhanced up to Rs.7,50,000/- and the petition
is required to be allowed.
8. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Rule is made
absolute.
9. In SCA No.4987 of 2023 the respondent is directed to
pay the lump sum compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- instead
of Rs.30,000/- to the petitioner and in SCA No.5846 of
2023 the respondent is directed to pay the lump sum
compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- instead of Rs.70,000/- to
the petitioner .
10. The same shall be paid to the petitioners within a period
of four months from today. Any amount already paid be
adjusted against this lump sum compensation of
Rs.7,50,000/-.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
ARCHANA S. PILLAI
