IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 696 of 2012 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6523 of 2011 With LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 697 of 2012 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6522 of 2011 CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4711 of 2012 For Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH ========================================= ============================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT DY.EXECUTIVE ENGINEER & 2 - Appellant(s) Versus ASHOKKUMAR CHANDRASHANKAR MEHTA - Respondent(s) ========================================= Appearance :
Mr Rakesh Patel, AGP for Appellant(s) : 1 - 3. MR KAMLESH C KOTECHA for Respondent(s) : 1, MR PREMAL S RACHH for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH Date : 24/07/2012 ORAL (COMMON) JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
1. Both the Appeals are preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent from the common oral order dated 18.7.2011 of learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the appellants' petitions arising from the award of the Labour Court were dismissed. In view of the averments made in the petition and the issues decided by learned Single Judge in the impugned order, it could more properly be, in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution. No allegations were made and no relief was claimed by the appellants against the Labour Court which made the impugned awards. Therefore, prima facie, the appeals would not be maintainable and would be liable to be dismissed as such.
2. However, it was argued by learned AGP Mr Rakesh Patel that the petition was styled as one under section 226 of the Constitution and the important issue of reinstatement of the respondents after about 25 years was involved. He, further submitted that the respondents had staked their claim for reinstatement only on the basis of reinstatement of few other employees by virtue to orders of this court. Although it could not be disputed that those are the employees who were not only reinstated in the year 1995 but they were made permanent in service and the respondents herein were not junior to those employees. Under the circumstances, provisions of Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were squarely attracted and applying, and hence award ordering reinstatement with 25% back wages was made by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar. In these facts and circumstances, relying upon observations of the Apex Court in the case of Harjinder Singh v. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation reported in AIR 2010 SC 1116, learned Single Judge has taken the legal and reasonable view within the limited jurisdiction of judicial review. Thus the appeals having been found to be wholly devoid of any merit, they are dismissed in limine, along with the Civil Applications.
[D. H. WAGHELA, J.] [G. B. SHAH, J.] msp