Jamnagar Municipal Corporation vs Navalsinh Rajmalji

A.L. Dave, J.—Admitted.

As all these appeals challenge the common order passed in various Special Civil Applications on 12.04.2010, these appeals are heard together and decided by this common judgment.

Since a narrow question arises for determination by this Court, at the request of the learned advocates for the parties, the appeals are finally heard and decided today.

This group of appeals arises out of the common order dated 12.4.2010 passed in Special Civil Application Nos. 4440/2010 to 4445/2010. The said petitions arose out of the common Award dated 11.1.2010, passed by the Labour Court, Jamnagar in Reference Case Nos. 190/1998 to 196/1998, whereby the Labour Court ordered reinstatement of the workmen-respondents herein along with 20% back wages. One employee Kamlesh Bhikhubhai Hada died during the pendency of Reference on 19.9.2007 and, therefore, the Labour Court ordered that he should be deemed to have been reinstated from 9.11.1996 to 19.9.2007 for the purpose of back wages.

The workmen came to be terminated from service from 9.11.1996. They, therefore, made References which came to be allowed, as stated above, by the Labour Court holding that they were entitled to be reinstated with 20% back wages.

The learned Single Judge by the common order impugned in these appeals, dismissed the petitions and hence these appeals.

Learned advocate Mr. Bhatt for the appellant- Corporation raised a number of contentions, as far as the order of reinstatement is concerned, and also submitted that for such a long time, the workmen would not have remained unemployed and, therefore, 20% back wages awarded by the Labour Court is not justified.

Learned advocate Mr. Mishra has opposed these appeals.

Having gone through the Award of the Labour Court and the order of the learned Single Judge, we find that all the relevant aspects have been considered for reinstatement including number of days for which the employees had worked in the preceding year. However, there is no material on record to show that the workmen were not gainfully employed during the period between their dismissal and reinstatement. In this set of circumstances, we are of the view that 20% back wages awarded are not justified and the reinstatement ordered is fully justified. The appeals, therefore, deserve to be partly allowed.

The appeals are partly allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.4.2010 passed in Special Civil Application Nos. 4440/2010 to 4445/2010 is hereby modified to the extent that the order for reinstatement is confirmed, but the back wages part is denied. The appeals stand disposed of accordingly. No costs.

Civil Application Nos. 12410 to 12416 of 2010

Since the main appeals are disposed of, these civil application do not survive and stand disposed of accordingly.