1.0 This petition is directed against the judgement and award dated 16.04.2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Anand in Reference ( LCA) No. 630 of 1992 ( Old No. 417 of 1989) whereby the reference of the respondent came to be partly allowed and petitioner is directed to reinstate the respondent on his original post with continuity of service and with 25% backwages.
2.0 The respondent was engaged on daily rate basis as Sweeper cumWard boy purely on temporary and adhoc basis in the Health Centre of the Petitioner University at Anand on 01.05.1985. The respondent himself left the work on 09.12.1989 and did not report for work inspite of repeated offers made by the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter raised industrial dispute being Reference ( LCA) No. 630 of 1992 against the petitioner. During the pendency of the Reference a settlement was arrived at between the parties and on 28.12.1993, the respondent was reinstated in service. The Labour Court passed award in Reference ( LCA) No. 630 of 1992 and directed to pay 40% backwages from 12.09.1989 to 28.12.1993. As per the award of the Labour Court, back wages were paid.
2.1 Though the services of the respondent was not terminated by the petitioner, the respondent raised industrial dispute being Reference ( LCA) No. 6 of 1995 and claimed reinstatement with continuity of service and with full backwages. After adjudicating, the Labour Court passed the judgement and award as stated hereinabove.
3.0 Pursuant to suggestion of the Court when the matter was argued on 27.11.2012 and 06.12.2012 for settlement, the petitioner has agreed to pay lumpsum compensation of Rs. 40000/ to the respondent. However, the respondent has not agreed to this proposition.
4.0 However, it is an admitted fact that the respondent was engaged as daily wager. The law on the aspect of grant of backwages is settled. On the facts and circumstances of the case and especially in view of the fact that the respondent was working as a daily wager, grant of backwages cannot be justified in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Senior Superintendent Telegraph (Traffic), Bhopal, Vs. Santosh Kumar Seal and others, reported in 2010(6) SCC 773. Hence, in my view grant of compensation of Rs. 40000/ to the respondent in lieu of reinstatement shall meet the ends of justice. Order accordingly. This will be treated as full and final settlement between the parties. The award of the Labour Court is modified accordingly. The petitioner is directed to make such payment within a period of one month from today.
5.0 The petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) niru*