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

2006 Supreme(Guj) 14

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :SHARAD D.DAVE
DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN - Appellant
Versus
JAYANTILAL N PATEL - Respondent
Special Civil Application 4079 of 1989
Decided On : 01/12/2006

Advocates Appeared: HARDIK C.RAWAL

Headnote:

Labor law - Industrial dispute Act - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 227 – Workmen - Petitioner Divisional Controller Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation has challenged judgment and award - Petitioner corporation was directed to place respondent in Matriculate Clerk Grade with effect from within one month from publication of award and it was also directed that petitioner corporation should pay difference amount till date for which respondent is entitled - It appears from record that respondent and other workmen raised an industrial dispute which was referred to Industrial Tribunal Rajkot for adjudication - Respondent and other workmen filed statement of claimed a demand was raised that respondent and other workmen who are matriculate should be placed in revised pay scale as per Resolution passed by petitioner Corporation filed reply and resisted demands made by respondent and other workmen - Ultimately Industrial Tribunal after appreciating evidence on record and hearing both sides by its judgment and award - Held, Honble Apex Court in case of Union Tribunal has no power to recall or review of its earlier award on merits in absence of provision conferring power of review on Tribunal either expressly or by necessary implication - In that view of matter find some force in contention of advocate appearing for petitioner that Tribunal has no power to recall or review its earlier award on merits order passed by Industrial Tribunal Rajkot in Misc. Application of modifying award is required to be quashed and set aside - In result this order passed by Industrial Tribunal Rajkot in Misc. Application is quashed and set aside and judgment and award passed by Industrial Tribunal Rajkot in Reference is hereby upheld - Petitioner Corporation is directed to extend benefits to concerned workmen flowing from judgment and award passed by Industrial Tribunal Rajkot in Reference as early as possible - Petition allowed (Para 7)

( 1 ) BY filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Divisional Controller, Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, rajkot has challenged the judgment and award dated 13. 07. 1988 passed by the industrial Tribunal, Rajkot in Reference (IT) No. 18 of 1984 (old (IT) No. 233 of 1977) and order dated 19. 12. 1988 in Misc. Application No. 2 of 1988 in reference (IT) No. 18 of 1984. By the aforesaid judgment and award dated 13. 7. 1988, the petitioner "corporation was directed to place the respondent in Matriculate Clerk Grade with effect from 1. 7. 1977 within one month from the publication of the award and it was also directed that the petitioner" corporation should pay the difference amount till the date for which the respondent is entitled.

( 2 ) IT appears from the record that the respondent and other workmen raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot for adjudication. The respondent and other workmen filed statement of claims, wherein a demand was raised that the respondent and other workmen who are matriculate should be placed in the revised pay scale as per Resolution No. 555 passed by the petitioner Corporation. The petitioner Corporation filed reply and resisted the demands made by the respondent and other workmen. Ultimately, the Industrial Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record and hearing both the sides, by its judgment and award dated 13. 07. 1988, directed the petitioner Corporation to place the respondent in Matriculate clerk Grade with effect from 1. 1. 1977 within one month from the publication of the award and also directed to pay the difference amount till the date for which the respondent is entitled.

( 3 ) IT also appears from the record that the respondent and other workmen, thereafter, filed an application being Misc. Application No. 2 of 1988 for modification of the award dated 13. 07. 1988 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, rajkot. Ultimately, the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot, by its order dated 19. 12. 1988 modified the award passed on 13. 07. 1988 and directed the petitioner "corporation that Shri Jayantilal Patel and other workmen P. K. Mehta, p. V. Bhatt, V. K. Thakore, J. G. Oza, P. N. Pujara, A. K. Zhala, J. T. Chanbar, c. A. Zhala, B. N. Jadeja and Harshadray Ambashankar be placed in Matriculate clerk Grade within one month from the publication of the award and they be paid differential amount within one month for which they are entitled. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the aforesaid judgment and award dated 13. 07. 1988 as well as the order dated 19. 12. 1988 passed by the Industrial tribunal, Rajkot, the petitioner" Corporation has preferred the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing and setting aside the same. Heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

( 4 ) IT can be noticed from the record that this is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Industrial Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, has come to the conclusion that as per Resolution No. 555, the respondent and other workmen are required to be placed in the Grade of rs. 55-4-70-5-110. The Industrial Tribunal has also come to the conclusion that the action of the petitioner "corporation was illegal and arbitrary. The industrial Tribunal has also recorded the finding that though the respondent was Matriculate Clerk, he was not paid salary as per the grade. Considering the evidence on record as well as having examined Resolution No. 555, the industrial Tribunal directed the petitioner" Corporation to place the respondent and other workman in Matriculate Clerk Grade with effect from 1. 7. 1977 within one month from the publication of the award and also directed to pay difference of amount till the date for which the respondent is entitled.

( 5 ) IN this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that this Court has very limited juris





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top