Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/1179/2002 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1179 of 2002
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8509 of 2000
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
=================================================
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 ?
=================================================
GODHRA
NAGARPALIKA - Appellant(s)
Versus
EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER & 1 - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance
:
MR RN SHAH for Appellant(s) :
1,
MR DG CHAUHAN for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR UM SHASTRI for
Respondent(s) : 2,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
Date
: 27/06/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We
have heard Mr R.N. Shah, Sr.Counsel for the appellant , Mr D.G.
Chauhan, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Mr U M Shastri,
learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. This intra court
Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant, Godhra
Nagarpalika challenging the order dated 24.4.2002 passed by the
learned Single Judge in SCA No.8509 of 2000.
2. The
facts of the case in brief are that the respondent workman was
appointed in 1984 as daily rated employee under a scheme for and on
behalf of Godhra Nagarpalika, the appellant. He was appointed for
repairing and maintenance of supply of water during summer season.
After the work was over, his services came to be terminated in the
year 1985. After nine years, the respondent raised an industrial
dispute claiming reinstatement in service. The Labour Court, by its
award dated 30.7.1999 passed in Reference (LCG) No.120/1994 directed
reinstatement with all consequential benefits without back wages.
Against the award, the appellant has filed Special Civil Application
No.8509 of 2000 before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single
Judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the appellant to
reinstate the respondent with full wages from the date of award till
the date of actual reinstatement. This order is under challenge in
this Appeal.
3. On
1.3.1987, respondent No.2 joined a new service with Usha Sleeper
Udhyog at Bhamaiya, Godhra and he is in service with the aforesaid
company till now. This fact is not disputed by Mr U M Shastri,
learned counsel for respondent No.2 and he admits that his client is
in service with Usha Sleeper Udhyog at Bhamaiya from 1.3.1987.
Therefore, the award of the Labour Court as well as the judgment of
the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 8509 of
2000 directing reinstatement of respondent No.2 in service is illegal
as respondent No.2 has already joined another service and he does not
want to come back and serve under the appellant.
4.
In view of this admitted position, this appeal succeeds and is
allowed. The award of the Labour Court dated 30.7.1999 passed in
Reference (LCG) No.120/1994 and the order of the learned Single Judge
dated 24.4.2002 passed in SCA No.8509 of 2000 are required to be set
aside and are accordingly set aside.
The
parties shall bear their own costs.
[V
M SAHAI, J.]
[G
B SHAH, J.]
msp
Top