IMPORTANT POINT
Reinstatement inherently includes continuity of service, entitling the employee to benefits from the initial date of joining, despite a period of illegal termination.

JUDGMENT :

Nirzar S. Desai, J.

1. As the issue pertains to grant of benefit of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 and as the petitioner has claimed such benefits from his initial date of joining, which according to Mr.P.C.Chaudhari, learned advocate for the petitioner, is a covered issue. With the consent of the parties, the matter was taken up finally. Hence, Rule returnable forthwith. Mr.Sanjay Udhwani, learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for conferring the benefits or a direction to the respondents to grant the benefit of the resolution dated 17.10.1988 from initial date of joining and on completion of 5 years, 10 years and 15 years service respectively. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the respondents to fix the salary of the petitioner by considering the intervening period i.e. from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement as notional and has further prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay arrears from the actual date of reinstatement with all consequential benefits.

3. The facts of the petition as stated by Mr.P.C.Chaudhari, learned advocate for the petitioner are stated as under:-

3.1. That the petitioner is working under the respondents since 1990 as a Peon. He was illegally terminated from services on 1.11.1999 and the petitioner challenged the said action of termination by way of Reference (L.C.A.) No.1003/2000 before the Labour Court at Ahmedabad. The Labour Court, Ahmedabad passed an award dated 30th October, 2003 and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner on his original post with continuity of service along with full back-wages. Since the order passed by the Labour Court was an ex-parte order and based upon that order, as the petitioner preferred the Recovery Application claiming the backwages, the respondents preferred the application for restoration. However, the said restoration was also dismissed by the Labour Court by order dated 13.03.2008. The aforesaid orders of award and rejecting the restoration application were challenged before this Court by the respondents by way of Special Civil Application No.9662 of 2008 and during pendency of that petition, the petitioner was reinstated. However, subsequently, the said Special Civil Application No.9662 of 2008 was partly allowed vide judgment dated 5.8.2022 by the co-ordinate bench of this Court, whereby the order passed by the Labour Court dated 30th October, 2003 in Reference (LCA) No.1003 of 2000 was quashed and set aside qua back-wages only and rest of the directions issued by the Labour Court remained the same.

3.2. Now, in view of the fact that the petitioner's termination was held to be illegal and except for the backwages, the order of reinstatement was kept as it is by the co-ordinate bench vide order dated 05.08.2022, in petition, the petitioner has prayed for the benefit of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 on completion of 5 years, 10 years and 15 years of service as per the provision of the aforesaid resolution as the petitioner has almost completed 32 years services under the respondents.

4. Mr.P.C.Chaudhari, learned advocate for the petitioner relied upon the decision of this Court in case of Nanjibhai Madhabhai Vs. State of Gujarat in Special Civil Application No.2192 of 2017 decided on 24.07.2018 and by relying upon the said decision, learned advocate Mr.P.C.Chaudhari submitted that the facts of the present petition are almost identical and while allowing the petition and while directing the respondents to confer and grant the benefits to the petitioner of Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, suitable directions were issued by the co-ordinate bench to the State Government to the extent of reckoning the services of the petitioner from initial date of his joining and depending upon the completion of requisite number of services, to confer the corresponding benefits under the said resolution. It was