State of Gujarat vs Gaglubhai Navkubhai Gaekwad

K.S. Jhaveri, J.—This Special Civil Application is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 28.08.2000 passed by the Labour Court,

Navsari in Reference (LCN) No. 30 of 1992 by which the Reference filed by the respondent was allowed directing the petitioner to reinstate the

respondent at his original post i.e. on Rojamdar without backwages.

It is submitted by the petitioner that the respondent was working as Rojamdar on muster roll. The work was not in continuous in nature. The

respondent left the job of his own accord. The petitioner had given the work as and when the work was available and the respondent was never

appointed on regular basis. The petitioner submits that respondent has not put up 240 days of service in any year. After considering documentary

evidence on record, the Labour Court, Navsari, directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent at his original post. Being aggrieved by the said

judgment and award, the petitioner has preferred present petition. It is submitted that Labour Court has not considered the submissions made by

the petitioner.

It is submitted by learned AGP for the petitioner - State that Labour Court has ignored the facts on record that the respondent was engaged as

Rojamdar and respondent left the job of his own accord. It is submitted that preliminary contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner is not an

industry and hence provisions of Industrial Disputes Act are not applicable. It is also further submitted that respondent has not put 240 days of

service in any year. It is further submitted that respondent was never appointed on regular basis.

Heard Ms. Jayshree Bhatt, for Ms. Sharma for the respondent. It is submitted that the respondent filed statement of claim and contended that

respondent''s service were illegally terminated with effect from April, 1991.

This Court has perused the judgment and award passed by the learned Labour Court, Navsari. Considering the findings given by the Labour

Court, in my opinion, it appears that there is no illegality committed by the Labour Court in passing the impugned judgment and award and

directing the petitioner to reinstate the respondent at his original post i.e. on Rojamdar without backwages. The findings given by Labour Court are

just and proper and are not required to be interfered with as Labour Court has given cogent reasons. The Labour Court has discussed Exh.6 and

9 in para 10 and also considered services rendered by the respondent from 1986 to 1991 and come to the conclusion that he has been regularly

working but he has not completed 240 days in service continuously. However, since Exh.10 was not disputed by the petitioner and Exh.11 list of

documents demanded by the original claimant was not produced by the petitioner, therefore, inference was drawn by the Court, which is not

required to be interfered with.

In view of above, the petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed. No order as to costs. Rule discharged.