Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/2600/2011 5/ 5 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR DIRECTION No. 2600 of 2011
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 550 of 2004
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2235 of 1986
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Sd/-
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
Sd/-
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
NO
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
NO
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 ? NO
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
NO
=========================================================
HARISH
C. BRAHMBHATT & 25 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
OIL
& NATURAL GAS COMMISSION & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
HARSHAL PANDYA for MR PARESH UPADHYAY
for
Petitioners : 1-26.
MR KB NAIK for M/S TRIVEDI & GUPTA for
Respondents : 1 - 2.
MS MONALI BHATT ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
Date
: 19/04/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
1. Rule.
Learned counsel for the respondents waive service. During pendency
of the petition and the LPA, the applicants have approached for the
third time for revising their wages in terms of successive office
orders issued by respondent No.1. Two earlier orders granting similar
relief have been carried in appeal, but the orders have been
confirmed. According to the later order dated 20.12.2005 of Division
Bench of this Court, the applicants in Civil Application No.7155 of
2005 in LPA No.550 of 2004 stated the background of facts in brief
and about those facts there is no dispute. Thus, the undisputed and
relevant facts are that the applicants have been deployed as security
guards on the installations of ONGC for over 20 years and their
prayers to direct the respondents to revise wages in terms of the
orders of the ONGC have twice been granted. Initially, the applicants
were paid daily wages @ Rs.98/- which was revised to Rs.150/- by
virtue of order dated 20.10.2000 in C.A.No.7111 of 2000 in SCA
No.2235 of 1986. Later on, the minimum daily wages fixed at Rs.150/-
were revised to Rs.190/- in terms of order dated 09.7.2004 as amended
on 10.10.2004 of the ONGC, pending the appeal. While revising daily
wages from Rs.150/- to Rs.190/-, the Division Bench noted in its
order dated 20.12.2005 that at least during pendency of the appeal,
the applicants could not be deprived of the benefit of revised
minimum daily wages as per the office orders dated 09.7.2004 and
19.10.2004 of the ONGC. It was also noted that the applicants did not
pray for regular pay-scale and allowance at par with regular security
guards employed by the ONGC, but they claimed revised daily wages
payable and being paid to contingent/casual unskilled workers
rendering services to the ONGC, which was the lowest category of
employees working under the ONGC. That order of the Division Bench
was carried in appeal by way of SLP (Civil) No.3554 of 2006 and it
was disposed, without interfering with the aforesaid order, with the
observations as under:
“……This,
in our opinion, appears to be reasonable as that is the rate of
minimum wages being paid by the Oil & Natural Gas Commission (now
incorporated as Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.) to other
similarly situated employees also. ……As the bread and butter of
the small labourers are involved in the matter, we request the High
Court to expedite the hearing of the L.P.As and dispose of the same
preferably within a period of six moths.”
2. With
the above record of proceedings, the present application is made with
the prayers to direct the ONGC to pay wages @ Rs.350/- per day with
effect from 01.10.2008 as provided in the office order dated
20.12.2010 of the ONGC.
3. There
is no dispute about the fact that the respondent ONGC has issued
office order dated 20.12.2010, according to which the lowest minimum
rate of daily wages for contingent worker is fixed at Rs.350/- and
there is no other category of workers to whom lesser wages could be
paid. It was submitted by learned counsel Ms.Harshal Pandya,
appearing for the applicants, that the main appeal could not be heard
for final disposal in spite of their readiness and willingness to
argue the appeal, but the applicants cannot be made to suffer on that
account in view of the constant rise in cost of living index.
4. Learned
counsel Mr.Naik, appearing for the ONGC, submitted that they were
also ready and willing to have the main appeal heard on merits for
final disposal. In fact, it was under such circumstances that the
following order was initially made herein on 16.3.2011:
“Leave
to amend the prayer clause. Learned counsel, Mr.K.B.Naik, appearing
for the respondent sought time to take necessary instructions for
making appropriate statement before the Court. Present application
shall be listed along with main Letters Patent Appeal No.550 of 2004
for final hearing on 6th
April 2011, with the understanding that Letters Patent Appeal as well
as Civil Application may be peremptorily heard on that date and no
further adjournment may be granted in view of order dated 11.9.2006
of the Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.3554 of 2006,
which is now brought to the notice of this Court”.
In
spite of the above order, the main appeal could not be heard on the
appointed date or the subsequent date to which hearing was adjourned
either on account of absence of learned advocate or the court being
occupied with some other urgent matters.
5. In
the above facts and circumstances, there is no reason why order on
the same line as the order dated 20.12.2005 of the Division Bench in
C.A.No.7155 of 2005 should not be made for immediate relief and
sustenance of the applicants. Accordingly, the application is allowed
with the direction that respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall pay to the
applicants the revised daily wages @ Rs.350/- with effect from
01.10.2008 till and subject
to such further orders as may be made in the main appeal. The
respondents are directed to pay the arrears due latest by the end of
May, 2011. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.
6. The
appeal shall be listed for final hearing on 27.04.2011,
as suggested and agreed by learned counsel on both sides.
Sd/-
(
D.H.Waghela, J.)
Sd/-
(
K.A.Puj, J.)
(KMG
Thilake)
Top