Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Guj) 922

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.V.ANJARIA, BHARGAV D. KARIA, JJ.
Dharmsinh Desai University – Appellant
Versus
Natubhai Kantibhai Raval – Respondent
Civil Application (For Stay) No. 1 of 2020, Special Civil Application No. 5490 to 5507, 5489 of 2017, R/Letters Patent Appeal No.599, 670 to 674, 677, 680, 684 to 694 of 2022
Decided on : 30-09-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR. DHAVAL DAVE, MR JIGAR M PATEL
For the Respondent: MR UT MISHRA

The relief of reinstatement and backwages is not automatic and should be independently assessed, especially for daily rated workmen. The court should consider various factors, including the status of the workmen, nature of employment, span of service, and time gap from the date of termination, in deciding whether to grant reinstatement or award compensation.

Headnote:
Labour Court - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 25F, 25G, 25H - The court upheld the reinstatement and backwages awarded by the Labour Court to the workmen, finding a breach of mandatory provisions of the Act. The appellant University's contention that lump-sum compensation could have been awarded instead of reinstatement was rejected. The court emphasized that relief of reinstatement and backwages is not automatic and should be independently assessed, especially for daily rated workmen. It ultimately directed the University to pay lump-sum compensation of Rs.5,00,000 to each workman.
Fact of the Case:

The workmen were appointed as daily wagers in various departments of the University and were terminated without notice. The Labour Court found a breach of Sections 25F, 25G, and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and awarded reinstatement with 25% backwages. The University challenged this decision, arguing that there was no work available for the workmen and that lump-sum compensation could have been awarded instead of reinstatement.
Finding of the Court:

The court confirmed the findings of the Labour Court and rejected the University's contention that lump-sum compensation could have been awarded instead of reinstatement. It emphasized that relief of reinstatement and backwages is not automatic and should be independently assessed, especially for daily rated workmen. The court ultimately directed the University to pay lump-sum compensation of Rs.5,00,000 to each workman.
Issues: Breach of Sections 25F, 25G, and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; entitlement to reinstatement and backwages; consideration of lump-sum compensation instead of reinstatement.
Ratio Decidendi: The relief of reinstatement and backwages is not automatic and should be independently assessed, especially for daily rated workmen. The court should consider various factors, including the status of the workmen, nature of employment, span of service, and time gap from the date of termination, in deciding whether to grant reinstatement or award compensation. In this case, the court found that the workmen were entitled to lump-sum compensation instead of reinstatement and backwages.
Final Decision: The court confirmed the findings of the Labour Court and directed the University to pay lump-sum compensation of Rs.5,00,000 to each workman. All the appeals were disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

N.V.ANJARIA, J.

All these appeals arise out of common judgment dated 16.10.2019 of learned single Judge in respect of the Special Civil Applications. The petitions in turn arose out of common judgment and award of Labour Court, Nadiad in different Reference cases.

1.1 All the appeals were notified together and were heard together. They are treated for present judgment simultaneously since the facts involved are similar and the issues identical.

2. In all Reference cases, the Labour Court directed reinstatement of the workman concerned with 25% backwages. Reference (LCN) Case No.64 of 2008 was treated as main which correspond to Special Civil Application No.5501 of 2017, which in turn became subject matter of challenge in Letters Patent Appeal No.599 of 2022, the first captioned appeal herein. Learned single Judge dismissed all the petitions upholding the judgment and award of the Labour Court of reinstatement and backwages as above.

3. Before the Labour Court, it was the workmen in statement of claim at Exhibit 4 inter alia stated that they were appointed in service in various department of the Dharamsingh Desai University- the appellant, that their service record was neat and clean, that they were performing the work of peons and sweepers as daily wagers for eight hours in a day. It was further stated that the work was of perennial nature. The workmen claimed that the Vice Chancellor illegally terminated their services orally on 26.5.2008 without giving any notice or notice pay.

3.1 The appellant filed written reply at Exhibit 14 wherein it was contended that the workmen were daily wagers who were provided work depending upon the availability. It was stated that when the work was not available they were sent back. It was contended that the workmen did not work for 240 days in any year. It was denied that the workmen were entitled to any relief. The term of Reference before the Labour Court was whether the applicant concerned should be reinstated to original post with back wages.

3.2 The basic details in each case are summarized in tabular form as under.

3.2.1 Each of the workman joined on 1.4.1987. They were paid salary at Rs.35 per day and the services of each of the workmen was terminated on 26.5.2008.

Sr. No.	LPA Nos.	SCA Nos. – References before the Labour Court	Names and Posts
1.	599/22	5501/17 - 84/08	Natubhai Kantibhai Raval - Peon, Computer
2.	694/22	5489/17 - 64/08	Kiranbhai Somabhai Bhai - Peon, Examination
3.	685/22	5507/17 - 77/08	Ranchodbhai Manibhai Parmar -Peon, Examination
4.	684/22	5506/17 - 75/08	Ashokbhai Buddhabhai Parmar -Sweeper, Chemistry
5.	692/22	5505/17 - 73/08	Sureshbhai Bachubhai Rathod -Peon, B.C.E
6.	680/22	5504/17 - 81/08	Baldevbhai Babubhai Parmar - Peon, Examination
7.	689/22	5503/17 - 83/08	Bharatbhai Govindbhai Solanki - Peon, I.C.
8.	674/22	5502/17 - 71/08	Kamleshbhai Jayantilal Sharma - Peon, C.E.
9.	688/22	5500/17 - 90/08	Bharatbhai Dayabhai Solanki -Peon, Health
10.	687/22	5499/17 - 84/08	Sunilbhai Kanubhai Rawal - Peon, Chemical
11.	673/22	5498/17 - 76/08	Jayantibhai Fatabhai Parmar - Peon, E.C.
12.	671/22	5497/17 - 65/08	Chatrasinh Amarsinh Parmar - Peon, M.B.A.
13.	690/22	5496/17 - 72/08	Gautambhai Ramanbhai Parmar - Peon, B.C.E.
14.	670/22	5495/17 - 78/08	Sanjaybhai Chimanbhai Vasava - Peon, E.C.
15.	693/22	5494/17 - 67/08	Buddhabhai Dhudabhai Parmar -Peon, I.C.
16.	686/22	5493/17 - 86/08	Nimeshkumar Dipakkumar Shah -Peon, Placement
17.	677/22	5492/17 - 69/08	Jaswantbhai Somabhai Parmar - Peon, Mechanic
18.	691/22	5491/17 - 70/08	Rameshbhai Balubhai Gohel - Peon, Mechanic
19.	672/22	5490/17 - 74/08	Bharatbhai Kantibhai Rathod - Peon, Examination