Subhash Chand Regar S/O Shri Shankar Lal vs The Secretary (2024:Rj-Jp:39241-Db)
2024 Latest Caselaw 5813 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Subhash Chand Regar S/O Shri Shankar Lal vs The Secretary (2024:Rj-Jp:39241-Db) on 17 September, 2024

Bench: Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Ashutosh Kumar

  [2024:RJ-JP:39241-DB]

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                       BENCH AT JAIPUR

               D. B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 595/2023
                                             In
                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10967/2021
  Subhash Chand Regar S/o Shri Shankar Lal, Aged About 42 years,
  Resident of Village and Post Hanutpura, Tehsil Shahpura, District
  Jaipur (Rajasthan).
                                                              ----Appellant/Petitioner
                                          Versus
  The Secretary, Jaipur Development Authority, JLN Marg, Jaipur,
  Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Respondent

For Appellant : Mr. Govind Gupta Advocate on behalf of Mr. M.F. Baig Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

Judgment 17/09/2024

1. There is delay of 45 days in filing of the appeal.

2. Application No. 222/2023 has been filed under Section 5 of the

Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal.

3. Upon due consideration of the cause shown in the application,

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned.

4. Application No. 222/2023 is allowed.

5. Heard.

6. Order passed by the learned Single Judge is assailed mainly on

the ground that though the appellant was entitled to reinstatement,

Labour Court No. 1, Jaipur instead of granting reinstatement, passed

an order of payment of compensation and that too a very meagre

amount.

[2024:RJ-JP:39241-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-595/2023]

7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that once it is

found that the termination is in violation of the provisions contained

in Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, reinstatement

should be automatic and payment of compensation should be an

exception.

8. In view of two authoritative pronouncements referred to by

learned Single Judge, we are unable to accept the submission of

learned counsel for the appellant.

9. In the case of B.S.N.L. Vs. Bhuramal (2014) 7 SCC 177, it

has been clearly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that where the

termination is found illegal on the basis of procedural defect and it

being not a case of any victimisation, unfair labour practice or mala

fides, payment of appropriate compensation in lieu of reinstatement

should ordinarily be ordered.

10. Similar view was taken by Division Bench of this Court in the

case of Deputy Conservator of Forests Vs. Sharifuddin (D.B.

Special Appeal Writ No. 700/2018 decided on 20.08.2019).

11. The aforesaid two decisions having been made basis by the

learned Single Judge to develop the approach leading to conclusion

drawn by it, we do not find that there is any ground to interfere with

the order passed by the learned Single Judge, more so, when the

learned Single Judge has also enhanced the compensation amount

from Rs. 1,00,000/- to Rs. 1,50,000/-.

12. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ

MANOJ NARWANI-AARZOO/62

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)