Gujarat High Court
Jetpur Nagarpalika Now Jetpur Navagadh ... vs Nanduben Arjanbhai on 8 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2182 of 2009
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
JETPUR NAGARPALIKA NOW JETPUR NAVAGADH NAGARPALIK
Versus
NANDUBEN ARJANBHAI & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR BHAVESH P TRIVEDI(2731) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR RR TRIVEDI(941) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MP SHAH(2418) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 08/12/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
By the present Special Civil Application, the petitioner Nagarpalika has impugned the judgment and award dated 15.5.2008 passed by the learned Labour Court, Rajkot whereby the Reference (LCR) Nos.405 of 1991 and 438 of 1991 stand partly Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023 undefined allowed.
2. Mr. Bhavesh P. Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that both the respondent workmen were engaged on daily wages of Rs.24.40 ps. as garden labourer with the petitioner Nagarpalika. That their services came to be terminated on 31.1.1991. Aggrieved by the removal, the respondent workmen raised a dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Rajkot who by order dated 6.5.1991 made a reference to the learned Labour Court. He submits that the reference was made under Sections 25F, 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ["ID Act" for short] and in the reference, prayer was made for reinstatement with back wages. He further submits that while rejecting the prayers of the respondent workmen, the learned Labour Court has held that there is a breach of Section 25H of the ID Act and in lieu of the reinstatement, since the respondent workmen attained the age of superannuation, the learned Labour Court has awarded compensation of Rs.40,000/- each to both the workmen from the date of their retrenchment till the date of their superannuation. He submits that the respondent workmen could not prove their case for breach of Sections 25F and 25G of the ID Act. He submits Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023 undefined that the learned Labour Court has erroneously appreciated the evidence to come to the conclusion that there is breach of Section 25H of the ID Act, inasmuch as, the petitioner Nagarpalika has employed other persons in place of the retrenched workmen. He submits that the breach of Section 25H of the ID Act has been held dehors the proper evidence brought on record. He submits that the learned Labour Court has relied upon the statement of the witness of the Nagarpalika in cross-examination whereby it has been stated by the said witness that if new workers are engaged, they are also being paid at the same rate. He, therefore, submits that the present Special Civil Application be allowed.
3. Per contra, Ms. Kruti M. Shah, learned advocate appearing for the respondent workmen submits that the respondents were working as garden labourers in the Garden Department of the Nagarpalika and they were executing their duties sincerely and without any notice or notice pay, their services came to be terminated. She submits that the respondents were working with the Nagarpalika since long and therefore, in breach of the provisions of the ID Act, the learned Labour Court has rightly granted lump sum compensation from the date of retrenchment till Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023 undefined the date of superannuation. She submits that even looking at the amount awarded to the respondent workmen, no interference is called for as the same is just and proper and after taking into account the daily wages which were being paid to the said respondents. She submits that the impugned order be upheld and the present Special Civil Application be dismissed.
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the documents on record.
5. At the outset, it is to be noted that the respondent workmen have not challenged the award passed by the learned Labour Court. The learned Labour Court has given cogent reasons for rejecting the claim of the respondent workmen in respect of the breach of provisions of Sections 25F and 25G of the ID Act. However, it is to be noted in the present case that the witness of the Nagarpalika in his cross-examination has stated that the new workmen who were engaged were being paid the same wages as was being paid to the respondents. The said statement is on record by way of oral evidece. In view thereof, it cannot be said that the learned Labour Court has erred in awarding compensation to the respondent workmen. Further, it is also to be noted that the Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023 undefined respondent workmen had attained age of superannuation during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned Labour Court and therefore, the award for grant of lump sum compensation is also just and proper, inasmuch as, the same has been awarded from the date of termination till the date of superannuation. No infirmity has been pointed out from the documents on record in respect of the findings arrived at by the learned Labour Court. No interference is called for in the present Special Civil Application. The present Special Civil Application is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated forthwith. No order as to costs.
6. It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner Nagarpalika that the amount of compensation being Rs.40,000/- each towards both the respondents has been deposited in this Court by way of Cheque dated 17.7.2009 in favour of the Registrar, High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad on 21.7.2009. This Court by order dated 8.7.2009 had directed that the said amount be kept in a fixed deposit till the final outcome of the present Special Civil Application.
Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2182/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/12/2023 undefined
7. In view of the dismissal of the present Special Civil Application, it would be open for the respondents to make appropriate application to the registry of this Court for withdrawal of the amount of compensation so deposited along with interest accrued thereon.
Upon making appropriate application, the registry is directed to verify the identity of the respondent workmen and accordingly, release the amount of compensation along with interest accrued thereon.
The present Special Civil Application accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) KAUSHIK D. CHAUHAN Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 08 20:45:52 IST 2023