SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Guj) 16

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :M.R.CALLA
ABDULSATTAR I.SHAIKH - Appellant
Versus
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION 5285 of 1991
Decided On : 01/28/1999

Advocates Appeared: L.R.PUJARI, S.K.VISHEN, SURESH M.TRIVEDI, TRIVEDI AND GUPTA

Headnote:Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Secs. 2(oo)(bb) & 25-F - Oral termination - Not in terms of any contract - No basis to say that petitioner did not complete 240 days in service - In view of violation of Sec. 25-F termination of petitioner cannot be sustained - Direction for reinstatement with back wages for the period he remained unemployed - Also directed that petitioner shall be treated to be continuing in service for all other benefits.

       It appears to be the admitted position that the petitioner was given appointment on 16.11.1989 in pursuance of which he joined on 19.11.1989. He was continued in the service by various orders passed from time to time. The last order was the order dated 6.3.1990 and thereafter no order extending the period of appointment further was passed. However, the fact remains that without passing any order after 6.3.1990 the petitioner was allowed to continue in service upto 15.7.1991 and was subjected to oral termination on and from 16.7.1991. Thus, there is no basis for the respondents to say that the petitioner did not complete 240 days in the service nor it can be said that the oral termination brought about on 16.7.1991 was the direct result of the terms of contract even if it is taken that the appointment was on contractual basis.

       It is admitted that the requirements of Sec. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act were not followed and the oral termination of the petitioner brought about from 16.7.1991, even if for reasons administrative or otherwise, must have preceded the following of the requirements of Sec. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The notice or the payment of one months pay in lieu of notice alongwith other benefits as contemplated under Sec. 25F should have been given/made as a pre requisite because it was a case of retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act.

       [Para 4]

       The net result of the aforesaid discussion is that the petitioners oral termination (retrenchment), as brought about on and from 16.7.1991, is found to be void and the same is hereby quashed and set aside and it is directed that the petitioner be reinstated in the service and the petitioner shall also be entitled to all consequential benefits right from the date of his termination, but it is made clear that the petitioner shall be entitled to the financial benefits relating to wages only for such period for which he has remained unemployed after 16.7.1991 and should the petitioner file a proper affidavit with regard to his being employed/partly employed/unemployed during the period of enforced idleness from 16.7.1991, the respondents shall be obliged to make the payment of backwages accordingly for such period for which he remained unemployed and notwithstanding the question of backwages, the petitioner shall be treated to be continuing in service for all other benefits as if his services had never been terminated on and from 16.7.1991.

       [Para 7]

M. R. CALLA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner claims to be a member of Socially and Educationally Backward Class on the basis of a Certificate held by him as issued by the Mamlatdar, Kapadvanj. A copy of this Certificate has been placed on record as Annexurea. The petitioner also claims that he has passed English type examination of 30 w. p. m. in April/may 1990 and Gujarati type examination of 20 w. p. m. in March 1986 and Gujarati type examination of 25 w. p. m. in July 1989 as conducted by State Examination Board for the State of Gujarat. The petitioner also claims to have appeared in English type examination of 40 w. p. m. by the same Board in June 1990 but he says that the Certificate to that effect had not been issued and that the same will be issued in due course. The petitioner has also come with the case that a Certificate has been issued in his favour by the Government recognized Institution, namely, shree Ganesh Type Classes, Kapadvanj where the petitioner had undergone this course. A copy of this Certificate has also been placed on record. The petitioner has also come with the case that he had passed the Higher Secondary Examination (Commerce Stream) conducted by Gujarat Secondary Examination Board, Gandhinagar in April 1982. The petitioner thus claiming eligibility for appointment as Typist, has stated that he was appointed as English Typist in the office of the Executive Engineer, Narmada Yojna Naher Vibhag, Thasra. He had faced the interview before the Selection Committee and after the interview dated 25. 10. 89 for the post of English Typist his candidature was considered as sponsored through the Employment Exchange, Nadiad, District - Kheda and vide order dt. 16. 11. 89 he was given appointment as English Typist as daily wager, temporarily for a period of one month in the first instance. In pursuance of this order dt. 16. 11. 89 the petitioner joined on 19. 11. 89. The term of appointment was extended by various orders passed from time to time and the last order, to which the petitioner has made reference, is the order dt. 6. 3. 90, which has been produced by the petitioner alongwith Special Civil Application as Annexure k. This appointment was again an appointment for a period of one month only. The petitioner then says that even after the expiry of this period of one month, he was allowed to continue in service on the same terms till 15. 7. 91 on which date his services were orally terminated because he refused to attend the office at the odd hours in night. The petitioner has thus assailed the aforesaid action of his oral termination and has complained of the violation of the Circular dt. 27. 6. 90 annexed with the petition as Annexure l issued by Narmada Water Resources Department of the Government of Gujarat wherein it has been provided that in case the worker is required to be terminated due regard must be given to the seniority and the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act so as to give the notice/notice pay and compensation. The petitioner has also stated that there is heavy work load of English Type and the 3rd post of English Typist is also sanctioned and that the posts of English Typists are lying vacant. It has also been clarified that there were 2 posts of English Typists and 1 post of Gujarati Typist and the 3rd post of English Typist is also sanctioned by the Department and after his termination 2 posts of English Typists were lying vacant. He has claimed the reliefs for setting aside the action of his unlawful termination with effect from 16. 6. 91 and has also sought a direction that he be appointed on a vacant post of English Typist. The petitioner has claimed the relief of reinstatement with full backwages.

( 2 ) THE petitioners claim, as aforesaid, has been sought to be traversed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3 through the affidavit-in-reply dt. 4. 12. 91 and the additional affidavit-in-reply dt. 15. 9. 92. The respondents have taken the stand that the petitioners appointment was only contractua















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top