1. By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Rajkot Municipal Corporation has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the impugned award dated 27.04.2010 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference (LCR) No.72/1996, by which the Labour Court has partly allowed the said reference by directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent without back wages but with continuity of service.
2. Number of submissions have been made by Ms. Asmita Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri K.M. Patel, learned Senior Advocate appearing with Shri P.M. Lakhani, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent on merits as well as on the point that whether relieving/terminating the service of the respondent on completion of the probation period, can be said to be a termination and/or retrenchment, whether he was in deem confirmation or not? However, looking to the case on behalf of the respective parties before the Labour Court, it appears that the aforesaid was not properly addressed before the Labour Court and that the Labour Court has no opportunity to consider the said aspect and therefore, this Court was of the opinion that matter is to be remanded to the Labour Court permitting the parties to make out an appropriate case by permitting the respondent to file additional statement of claim and permitting the petitioner to file reply to the said additional statement of claim and permitting the parties to lead the evidence afresh. There is a broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties to the same. Shri K.M. Patel, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent has stated under the instructions from his client that he has no objection if the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Labour Court is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Labour Court to consider the case on merits, on all the points afresh and in accordance with law. However, it is submitted that respondent may be permitted to file additional statement of claim and lead further evidence. Similarly, Ms. Asmita Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that in that case, petitioner be permitted to file reply to the additional statement of claim and lead the evidence afresh and the Labour Court be directed to decide and dispose of the case on merits and all points afresh.
3. In view of the above broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, present petition succeeds and impugned judgment and award dated 27.04.2010 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference (LCR) No.72/1996 is hereby quashed and set aside. Without further entering into the merits of the case and/or expressing anything on merits in favour of either parties and keeping all questions open, the matter is remanded to the Labour Court for deciding the reference afresh in accordance with law and on merits and on all points. It will be open for the respondent to submit an additional statement of claim and it will also be open for the petitioner to file reply to the additional statement of claim and/or additional reply to the statement of claim already filed and it will be for the parties to lead evidence afresh on all points and thereafter, the Labour Court to consider the same in accordance with law and on merits. Labour Court to finally decide and dispose of the reference at the earliest, however, no later than 12 months from the date of receipt of the writ of the present order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
(M.R.
Shah, J.) *menon Top