District Development Officer Panchmahals vs Raolji Harishchandra Swaroopsingh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5867 of 2002 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ================================================================

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

================================================================ DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PANCHMAHALS Petitioner(s) Versus RAOLJI HARISHCHANDRA SWAROOPSINGH Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance:

MR SUDHANSHU S PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR AY KOGJE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

Date : 20/12/2012 ORAL JUDGEMENT

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:­

[A] The Special Civil Application be admitted;

[B] Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside the judgement and order dated 26/11/2001 passed by the Labour Court, Godhra, below Exh. 62 on application 60 in Reference No. LCG/770/2001 (old Reference No. LCG/195/91) at Exh. J, to this petition.

[C] Pending the hearing and final disposal of this Special Civil Application by this Honourable Court, be pleased to grant ad­interim stay of further implementation and operation of the judgement and award dated 26/11/2001 passed by the Labour Court, Godhra, below Exh. 62 on application 60 in Reference No. LCG/770/2001 (old Reference No. LCG/195/91) at Exh. J, to this petition.

[D] xxx”

2. The brief facts leading to filing of this petition are that the respondent­workman was working as Daily wagers Peon with the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that since there was no work available, the respondent­workman was not offered the work from August, 1990. Against the action of the petitioner, the respondent­ workman raised Industrial Dispute, which culminated into Reference No. 195 of 1991 before the Labour Court, Godhra. However, the Labour Court vide its judgement and award dated 1.2.2000 allowed the said reference and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent­workman with full back wages.

2.1. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed S.C.A. No. 7210 of 2001 before this Court. This Court vide order dated 28.9.2001, allowed the aforesaid petition on condition that the petitioner will deposit an amount of Rs. 2,500/­ towards the cost and Rs.10,000/­ towards past payment of wags to the respondent­workman on or before 31.10.2001 and further directed the Labour Court to decide the Reference afresh within a period of six months from the date of passing of the order.

2.2. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a Misc. Civil Application No. 7210 of 2001 for extension of time upto 31.12.2001 to comply with the directions of this Court, which came to be allowed by this court. It is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the fact that the petitioner has complied the direction of this Court, the respondent­workman filed an application before the Labour court, inter alia contending that the order dated 28.9.2001 has not been complied with and he has not been paid the amount directed by this Court. The Labour Court vide judgement and order dated 1.2.2002 confirmed the its earlier order passed in Reference No. 195 of 1991. Hence, this petition.

3. Though served none appears for the respondents.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. It appears from the record that this Court has granted time upto 31.10.2001 to the petitioner to comply with the order of this Court. However, the petitioner filed Misc. Civil Application No. 1948 of 2001 before this court within the stipulated time for extension of time to comply with the directions of this Court. This court vide its order dated 7.12.2001 allowed the said application and extended time upto 31.12.2001. However, during the pendency of the Misc. Civil Application, the respondent filed an application before the Labour Court, inter alia contending that the order of this Court has not been complied by the petitioner. The Labour Court without examining the facts that Misc. Civil Application for extension of time was pending before this Court, has passed the impugned order and confirmed its earlier order.

5. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the Labour court has committed error in passing the impugned judgement and order and confirming its earlier order. The Labour

Court ought to have examine the fact that Misc. Civil Application for extension of time was pending before this Court. Therefore, the impugned judgement and order passed by the Labour Court appears to be erroneous and deserves to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the judgement and order dated 26.11.2001 passed below Ex.62 in Reference No.(LCG/770/2001(Old Reference No. LCG/195/91) by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Godhra, is quashed and set aside. The Labour Court is directed to decide the Reference on or before 30th June, 2013. The petition is allowed. Rule made absolute.

[K. S. JHAVERI, J.] pawan