Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4689/1995 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4689 of 1995
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. 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 ?
=========================================================
VINODRAI
M VALA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DIVISIONAL
CONTROLLER - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MUKESH H RATHOD for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 29/09/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or
direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned judgement and
award dtd.6/4/1995
passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference
(LCB) No.159 of 1993, by which the Labour Court has dismissed the
said reference.
The
petitioner
was appointed as a reliever Watchman and as and when
the work was available on non-availability of regular Watchman, he
was called for duty and during the period between October, 1982 and
March, 1984, in all the petitioner
workman worked only for 228 days. It appears that as
the work was not available, he was not for duty on and from
31/3/1984 and therefore, the petitioner
raised an industrial dispute, which came to be
dismissed by the Labour Court by holding that the appointment of the
petitioner
was on contractual basis as reliever Watchman and
that he has not worked for 240 days in the last preceding year.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement and
award passed by the Labour Court in dismissing the aforesaid
reference, the petitioner
has preferred the present Special
Civil Application under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.
Having
heard the learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties
and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, more
particularly when the appointment of the petitioner
workman was found to be on contractual basis as
reliever Watchman and considering the fact that as and when the work
was available and on non-availability of regular Watchman, the
petitioner
was called for duty and considering the fact that the
petitioner
workman has worked only for 228 days during the
period between October, 1982 and March, 1984, and that the the
petitioner
workman has not worked for 240 days, it cannot be
said that the Labour Court has committed any error and/or illegality
in dismissing the reference, which calls for interference of this
Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India. The impugned judgement and award passed by
the Labour Court is just and legal and no interference at the hands
of this Court is called for.
In
view of the above and for the reasons stated above, there is no
substance in the present petition, which deserves to be dismissed
and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as
to costs.
[M.R.
SHAH, J.]
rafik
Top