Gujarat High Court
Rajula Municipality vs Bhagubhai Apabhai Dhakhada & 9 on 4 September, 2015
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5702 of 2001
With
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1340 of 2002
With
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3828 of 2002
With
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3843 of 2002
With
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9121 of 2002
With
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14035 of 2003
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
see the judgment ? NO
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
judgment ? NO
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or
NO
any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
RAJULA MUNICIPALITY....Petitioner(s)
Versus
BHAGUBHAI APABHAI DHAKHADA & 9....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
Page 1 of 17
HC-NIC Page 1 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015
C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT
MR RV DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 8 - 9
MR DHARMESH V SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 7
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 10
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 04/09/2015
CAV JUDGMENT
1 Since the issue raised in all the captioned writ petitions are more or less the same and are also interrelated, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2 The Special Civil Application No.5702 of 2001 and the Special Civil Application No.1340 of 2002 are filed by the Rajula Municipality calling in question the legality and validity of the various awards passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The impugned awards are sought to be challenged on the ground that the then President of the Municipality was not authorized or empowered, in any manner, to enter into the settlement with the employees for making them permanent in the Municipal establishment, and therefore, the settlement would not bind the Municipality in any manner.
3 The Special Civil Application No.3828 of 2002 has been filed by 16 employees, who were working as Daily Wagers, on the establishment of the Rajula Municipality and whose services were terminated in 2002. Page 2 of 17 HC-NIC Page 2 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT They seek to challenge their termination dated 23rd March 2002, principally on the ground that the Nagarpalika had not followed the due process of law under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, and other Labour Laws before terminating their services. The challenge is also on the ground that the services of the petitioners had been made permanent in view of the settlement arrived at by and between the petitioners and the Municipality before the Industrial Tribunal. It seems to be the case of the petitioners that in view of the settlement recorded by the Tribunal, the petitioners were made permanent on the establishment, and in such circumstances; their services could not have been terminated without giving them any opportunity of hearing. 4 The Special Civil Application No.3843 of 2002 has been filed by four Daily Wage employees whose services were terminated vide order dated 23rd March, 2002. The challenge is on identical grounds as raised in the aforenoted Special Civil Applications.
5 The Special Civil Application No.9121 of 2002 has been filed by a Daily Wager challenging his termination dated 23rd March, 2002 on the selfsame grounds as noted above.
6 The Special Civil Application No.5702 of 2001 has been filed by the Rajula Nagarpalika through its Administrator, against the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The challenge is substantially on the Page 3 of 17 HC-NIC Page 3 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT ground that the References of 1998 / 1999 were disposed of by recording the settlement between the Nagarpalika and the employees. It appears to be the case of the Nagarpalika that the outgoing President could not have entered into any settlement as he was not authorized in any manner and based on such settlement arrived at, the Tribunal could not have passed the impugned orders. It appears that the term of the President was coming to an end on 24th January 2001. In view of the Notification dated 10th January, 2001 and after the expiry of the term as the President, he had signed the socalled settlement. 7 The Special Civil Application No.1340 of 2002 has been filed by the Administrator challenging the legality and validity of the settlement arrived at by the outgoing President of the Municipality on 30th December, 1999, conferring permanent status upon the employees and the consequent award passed by the Industrial Tribunal dated 28th December, 1999. It appears that pursuant to the impugned award, the outgoing President moved a resolution dated 4th December, 2000 from the Chair to confer permanent benefits under the said award. The resolution was ultimately suspended from its operation by the Collector under Section 258 of the Municipality Act vide order dated 10th January, 2002.
8 The learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners Page 4 of 17 HC-NIC Page 4 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT (former employees of the Nagarpalika) submitted that all the petitioners were appointed on temporary basis and since they were not made permanent and were apprehending termination by the Nagarpalika, they were all compelled to approach the Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar, under different References (Industrial Tribunal Numbers). In the said References, compromise was arrived at between the petitioners and the Nagarpalika. The terms of settlement were reduced into writing duly signed by the President of the Nagarpalika and the petitioners. The Tribunal disposed of all the References in light of the settlement which was arrived at between the parties. It is submitted that on the strength of the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal, resolutions were passed by the Nagarpalika conferring permanent status to the petitioners. 9 It is submitted that thereafter, all of a sudden, the respondent No.2 - the Director of Municipality directed the Nagarpalika to terminate the services of the petitioners. It is submitted that no error could be said to have been committed by the Industrial Tribunal in passing the awards after recording the settlement. It is submitted that it could not be said that the President of the Nagarpalika, at the relevant point of time, had no authority or any power to enter into such settlement.
10 In such circumstances, referred to above, it is prayed that the Page 5 of 17 HC-NIC Page 5 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT order of termination deserves to be quashed and set aside and the petitioners be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. 11 On the other hand, Mr. R.V. Desaid, the learned advocate appearing for the Rajula Nagarpalika submitted that the consent awards, which are being relied upon, on behalf of the former employees dated 30th March, 2001, are ab initio void. The awards were obtained by practicing fraud. He submitted that the outgoing President, at the relevant point of time, without following any due process of law, entered into a settlement with the employees and helped the employees in securing permanent status on the establishment of the Municipality. Mr. Desai submitted that as it was not possible to hold the election on the expiry of the term of the Municipality, the State Government issued a Notification dated 10th January, 2011 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 8(A) and Subsection (4) of Section 281 of the Gujarat Municipality Act (for short, 'the Act') appointing an Administrator in the Rajula Municipality. He submitted that from 24th January 2001, the elected Office Bearers ceased to have any authority and it was the Administrator who had taken over the charge of the Nagarpalika. In such circumstances, the President could not have entered into a settlement for and on behalf of the Municipality. He submitted that the awards are not binding to the Municipality, as having been obtained by the employees Page 6 of 17 HC-NIC Page 6 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT in collusion with the outgoing President, who had ceased to be the President.
12 Mr. Desai submitted that each of the petitioners were appointed, as daily wagers. They could not have claimed the status of being permanent employees as their appointment itself was a backdoor entry. 13 In such circumstances, referred to above, Mr. Desai submitted that his petitions be allowed by quashing and setting aside the impugned awards passed by the Tribunal and the petitions filed by the former employees should be rejected.
14 Ms. Shruti Pathak, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Director of the Municipality supported Mr. Desai, the learned advocate appearing for the Nagarpalika. She submitted that the petition filed by the workmen deserves to be rejected, whereas the petition filed by the Nagarpalika deserves to be allowed and the impugned awards be quashed and set aside. Ms. Pathak submitted that the term of the Rajula Municipality had expired in January 2001 and the Administrator was appointed on and from 24th January 2001. She submitted that on one hand, on 24th January 2001, the Administrator was appointed and on the other, the outgoing President of the Nagarpalika, on the very same date, entered into a settlement with the workmen and the said settlement was made the basis for the awards Page 7 of 17 HC-NIC Page 7 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT passed by the Tribunal. She submitted that all the petitioners were working as Daily Wagers and were not permanent employees of the Nagarpalika. Ms. Pathak relied on Section 50 of the Gujarat Municipal Act which provides for the appointment of other officers and servants of the Municipality. Section 50 of the Act reads as under:
"(1) A municipality may with the previous sanction of the Director, create such posts of officers and servants other than those specified in subsection (1) and (2) of section 47 as it shall deem necessary for the purpose of carrying out the duties under the Act.
(2) The recruitment of such officers and servants and their condition of service shall be such as may be determined in accordance with rules made under section 271.
(3) The power to make appointment in any post referred to in sub section (1) shall vest in the municipality or in the authority empowered by the municipality by rules made in this behalf under section 271."
15 She submitted that according to the provisions of Section 50 of the Act, the previous sanction of the Director to create such posts of officers and servants is mandatory. She submitted that no prior approval or sanction of the Director was obtained by the Nagarpalika under Section 50 of the Act. According to her, in view of the provisions contained in Sections 47, 49 and 50 of the Act, when the posts were not sanctioned, the Daily Wagers could not have been regularized even otherwise by way of a settlement. Ms. Pathak placed strongly reliance on the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Amreli Municipality v. Gujarat Pradesh Municipal Employees Union reported in 2004 (2) Page 8 of 17 HC-NIC Page 8 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT GLH 692. She also pointed out that the initial appointments of the Daily Wagers were also without obtaining any prior permission and in violation of the instructions of the Government.
16 She also pointed out that two circulars dated 16th July 1977 and 12th June 1978 were issued by the State Government declaring that in no case, the number of Daily Wagers should exceed 10% of the sanctioned posts and, if necessary, such employees should be employed for a short period. She pointed out that later on, one another circular dated 20th October 1996 was issued by the Urban Development Department making it clear that no posts under Clauses 3 and 4 should be filled up for the Daily Wagers.
17 She relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Nand Kumar v. State of Bihar and others reported in 2014 (5) SCC 300 to contend that the petitioners cannot invoke the principle of legitimate expectation for being confirmed on the establishment. 18 She relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Chennai v. R. Govindaswamy and others reported in 2014 (4) SCC 769 to contend that mere continuation of service on temporary basis or as Daily Wagers would not confer any right on such employees to be absorbed in the service.
Page 9 of 17 HC-NIC Page 9 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT 19 She submitted that the petitions filed by the Daily Wagers should be rejected and the petitions filed by the Nagarpalika challenging the impugned awards be allowed.
20 Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, two questions fall for my consideration (1) whether the Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned awards on the basis of the settlement arrived at between the employees and the President of the Nagarpalika, and (2) whether the Daily Wagers are entitled to any relief, as prayed for, in their respective petitions.
21 The facts of this case are quite eloquent. It appears that the Tribunal committed a serious error in passing the impugned awards based on the settlement arrived at between the parties. Even if the settlement would have been genuine, the same would not have conferred any authority on the Tribunal to pass such awards in light of the decision of the Full Bench referred to above in the case of Amreli Municipality (supra). Everything was done in very suspicious circumstances. The date on which the settlement was arrived at, the Administrator had already taken over the charge of the Nagarpalika. The elected members could not be said to be holding any office on that particular date. Even otherwise, the status of being permanent employee Page 10 of 17 HC-NIC Page 10 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT could not have been conferred by such settlement in the absence of any valid sanction or permission from the Director of Municipality. There is a procedure prescribed in that regard by the provisions of the Act. 22 It appears that the petitioners are no longer in service past almost thirteen years and after these many years, I do not deem fit to look into the matters in details. I am at one with Mr. Desai, the learned advocate appearing for the Nagarpalika and Ms. Pathak, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent - State that the impugned awards deserve to be quashed and set aside. It is a settled law that the Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction to issue any direction or pass an award regularizing the services of the employees of a Municipality or any legal authority without their being any "sanctioned set up" and no person can be regularized, if such a person entered into the services without following any selection process under the title of being Daily Rated employee.
23 In the case of Nandkumar (supra), the Supreme Court made the following observations in paras 20, 23, 24 and 25 are as under:
"20. Therefore, considering the facts of the present case, it appears to us that the appellants were never appointed through a proper procedure. It is not in dispute that they all served as daily wagers. Therefore, it was within their knowledge all the consequences of appointment being temporary, they cannot have even a right to invoke the theory of legitimate expectation for being confirmed in the post. Accordingly, we cannot accept the contention of the appellants in the matter."Page 11 of 17
HC-NIC Page 11 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT ...
...
23. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We have also perused the records placed before us. We find that the status of the appellants was continuing to be as daily wagers. They cannot be treated as permanent Government employees. They all worked as employees of the Board. We have also found that no steps were followed by the Board to safeguard the service of these appellants. We have not been able to find out whether any advertisement was issued by the Government to regularise them. In these circumstances, in view of the submission which has been advanced on behalf of the appellants, we do not find that there is any substance in the matter/arguments put forwarded before us on behalf of the appellants as we have been able to find out that the appellants have served as daily wagers and we do find that Section 6(i) makes it clear that after the repeal of the Agriculture Produce Act, 1960, all officers and employees of the Board are to continue in employment and they shall continue to be paid what they were getting earlier as salary and allowance till such time the State Government takes an official decision as per the further provisions of Section 6. Such provision certainly allows continuance of the officers and employees of the Board to continue in employment in the same status. The status of the daily wage employees and regular employees of the Board is eminent from the said provision. It cannot be said that the status of the daily wage employees can enjoy or acquire the same status as that of the regular employees. In these circumstances, we do not find that there was any discrimination between the daily wage employees and the regular employees as is tried to be contended before us. Therefore, such submission has no substance, in our opinion, for the reason that the difference continues and is recognised under the said provision of the Repeal Act. So far as the power of the Committee of Secretaries constituted in terms of section 6(ii) of the Repeal Act is concerned, it is to prepare a scheme of absorption as well as of retirement, compulsory retirement or voluntary retirement and other service conditions of officers and employees of the Board. In our opinion, the scheme which was prepared by the Committee of Secretaries is only in the nature of recommendation and the State has the power either to accept, modify or amend the same before granting its official approval. Therefore, after the sanction is granted by the Government in respect of the said scheme, it would gain the status of statutory scheme framed under the said Act and would be enforced within the time to be indicated in section 6(iii) of the Repeal Act, 2006.
24. Therefore, in the light of the said provision, we do not find that the Committee of Secretaries can be faulted in treating the daily wage employees on a different footing and deciding for removal of their services.
Page 12 of 17 HC-NIC Page 12 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT
25. We have consciously noted the aforesaid decisions of this Court. The principle as has been laid down in Umadevi (supra) has also been applied in relation to the persons who were working on daily wages. According to us, the daily wagers are not appointees in the strict sense of the term 'appointment'. They do not hold a post. The scheme of alternative appointment framed for regular employees of abolished organisation cannot, therefore, confer a similar entitlement on the daily wagers of abolished organisation to such alternative employment. [See Avas Vikas Sansthan v. Avas Vikas Sansthan Engineers Association (2006 (4) SCC 132)]. Their relevance in the context of appointment arose by reason of the concept of regularisation as a source of appointment. After Umadevi (supra), their position continued to be that of daily wagers. Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to the rules. Usually, the projects in which the daily wagers were engaged, having come to an end, their appointment is necessarily terminated for want of work. Therefore, the status and rights of daily wagers of a Government concern are not equivalent to that of a Government servant and his claim to permanency has to be adjudged differently."
24 In the case of the Secretary to Government (supra), the Supreme Court in paras 6, 7 and 8 relied on earlier decision of the Supreme Court on the subject are as follows:
"6. In State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Umadevi & Ors., AIR 2006 SC 1806, this Court held as under:
"48....There is no fundamental right in those who have been employed on daily wages or temporarily or on contractual basis, to claim that they have a right to be absorbed in service. As has been by this Court, they cannot be said to be holders of a post,, a regular appointment could be made only by making consistent with the requirements of Articles 14 and of the Constitution. The right to be treated equally with the employees employed on daily wages, cannot be extended to a for equal treatment with those who were regularly. That would be treating unequals as equals. It cannot be relied on to claim a right to be absorbed in service though they have never been selected in terms of the recruitment rules."
7. In Union of India & Ors. v. A.S. Pillai & Ors., (2010) 13 SCC, this Court dealt with the issue of regularisation of parttime employees and the court refused the relief on the ground that part are free to get Page 13 of 17 HC-NIC Page 13 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT themselves engaged elsewhere and they are not from working elsewhere when they are not working for the/employer. Being the parttime employees, they are not to service rules or other regulations which govern and control regularly appointed staff of the department. Therefore, the of giving them equal pay for equal work or considering their for regularisation would not arise.
8. This Court in State of Rajasthan & Ors. v. Daya Lal & Ors., AIR SC 1193, has considered the scope of regularisation of irregular parttime appointments in all possible eventualities and laid downsettled principles relating to regularisation and parity in pay in the context of the issues involved therein. The same are as under:
"(i) The High Courts, in exercising power under Article 226 of Constitution will not issue directions for regularisation, or permanent continuance, unless the employees regularisation had been appointed in pursuance of a recruitment in accordance with relevant rules in an open process, against sanctioned vacant posts. The clause contained in Articles 14 and 16 should be followed and Courts should not issue a direction regularisation of services of an employee which would be of the constitutional scheme. While something that is for want of compliance with one of the elements in the of selection which does not go to the root of the, can be regularised, back door entries, appointments to the constitutional scheme and/or appointment of candidates cannot be regularised.
(ii) Mere continuation of service by a temporary or ad hoc or wage employee, under cover of some interim orders of the, would not confer upon him any right to be absorbed into, as such service would be "litigious employment". Even, ad hoc or dailywage service for a long number of, let alone service for one or two years, will not entitle employee to claim regularisation, if he is not working a sanctioned post. Sympathy and sentiment cannot be for passing any order of regularisation in the absence a legal right.
(iii) Even where a scheme is formulated for regularisation with cutoff date (that is a scheme providing that persons who had in a specified number of years of service and continuing in as on the cutoff date), it is not possible to others were appointed subsequent to the cutoff date, to claim or that the scheme should be applied to them by extending cutoff date or seek a direction for framing of fresh providing for successive cutoff dates.
(iv) Parttime employees are not entitled to seek regularisation they are not working against any sanctioned posts. There be a Page 14 of 17 HC-NIC Page 14 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT direction for absorption, regularisation or continuance of part time temporary employees.v) Parttime temporary employees in governmentrun institutions claim parity in salary with regular employees of the on the principle of equal pay for equal work. Nor can in private employment, even if serving full time, seek in salary with government employees. The right to claim a salary against the State must arise under a contract under a statute.""
25 In the case of Amreli Municipality (supra), the Full Bench of this Court made the following observations in paras 12.1.13 :
"12.1.13 Even if it is held that the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal has wide jurisdiction to alter conditions, it can exercise such powers subject to the recruitment rules, availability of sanctioned and subject to the grant and limits of budgetary. When there is no permanent post, no can be given to the authorities to absorb daily employees by creating new posts. It is the common in the case of Nagarpalikas/ Municipalities/ Corporations where such appointments are made political considerations. The parties in power may their own persons as daily rated employees and by seeking orders from the Court, they want to such employees on permanent establishment. Time again, such practice is deprecated in so many words the judgments referred by us. The Panchayats,, Municipal Corporations or Government as well as Government establishments are severe financial crisis only because of such staff may be required for the time being, but to make permanent would definitely adversely affect the substratum of respective organisations and the Courts should not be party to such illegal and irregular appointments by allowing them to be continued the cost of public exchequer. We are conscious of the that by not approving the appointments of such daily, it will be very difficult for them to survive and question of their livelihood would arise. Keeping aspect in mind, we do feel that in appropriate, their interests are required to be protected. We give following guidelines.
(1) If casual workers or daily rated workers are not by the Local bodies and whose services likely to be terminated, they should be on the principle of "last come, first". In the event of filling up the posts in, those who are eligible and qualified from amongst the relieved workmen shall be by waiving the age limit.
(2) If the workmen who have continued for years as employees, in the event of their, the authorities will see that no person is appointed in their place.
(3) The question of regularisation can also be by the authorities Page 15 of 17 HC-NIC Page 15 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT before terminating provided the workers are eligible on the posts.
(4) If the posts are not sanctioned, the authorities take such steps which are necessary in with the provisions of law/ rules/ within the budgetary provisions.
25.1 In para 12.1.14, the following observations were made :
"12.1.14 Thus, in view of the above, even if it is that keeping daily rated/casual employees for a long amounts to unfair labour practice, that fact by, will not make them permanent and/or regularise. While deciding such preferences for or permanency, the Labour Court/Tribunal, at the most, can pass order the authorities to consider their claim in the of factors/ observations stated above instead of away passing the orders of regularisation or permanency."
25.2 The final conclusion in para 12.1.15 is as under:
"12.1.15 In view of the above discussion, we the question referred to us as under:
(i) The Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal has no to issue direction or pass an award services of employees of a Municipality or local authority without there any 'sanctioned set up' and no person can regularised if such a person had entered without following selection process under title of daily rated employee.
(ii)In view of our answer to the above question, the rendered by Division Bench in the case Kalol Municipality Vs. Shantaben, reported in(2) GLR 997 is now no longer a good law in of subsequent decisions rendered by the Apex and more particularly the decision in the of N.S.Giri Vs. Corporation of State of, AIR 1999 SC 1958.The subsequent rendered by the Division Bench of this in the case of Halvad Nagarpalika and ors.. Jani Dipakbhai Chandravadanbhai and ors., in (2003) 2 GHCJ 397 is held to be a law. All the matters shall be placed before the Courts taking up such matters for passing orders."
26 In the aforesaid view of the matter, the Special Civil Application No.5702 of 2001 and the Special Civil Application No.1340 of 2002 are allowed. The impugned awards passed by the Industrial Tribunal are Page 16 of 17 HC-NIC Page 16 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015 C/SCA/5702/2001 CAV JUDGMENT hereby ordered to be quashed. The impugned settlement arrived at by the outgoing President of the Municipality on 30th December, 1999 conferring permanent status is also hereby declared to be illegal and erroneous. Rule is made absolute in Special Civil Applications Nos.5702 of 2001 and 1340 of 2002.
27 All other writ petitions filed by the former Daily Wagers are ordered to be rejected. Rule, if any, stands discharged. The adinterim order, if any, stands vacated forthwith.
28 All connected Civil Applications, if any, are also disposed of accordingly.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) After the order is pronounced, it is brought to my notice that there are some proceedings pending between the parties before the Labour Court. Those proceedings may be completed by the Labour Court in accordance with law.
(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) chandresh Page 17 of 17 HC-NIC Page 17 of 17 Created On Mon Sep 07 05:59:57 IST 2015