The companytroversy involved in the appeals is companyfined to short facts, which, however, need mention hereinbelow to appreciate the same.
Twenty Seven and Fifty Five Paisa .
Against the judgment decree of the Trial Court, the appellant filed first appeal being Civil Appeal No.45/1994 before the Assistant Judge, Bhavnagar.
The Letters Patent Appeal arose out of judgment and final order of the Single Judge dated 21.04.2006 in Special Civil Application No.8390 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant and affirmed the Award dated 01.02.2006 passed by Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference Case No.166 of 1992.
The appellant then filed Letters Patent Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court but it was dismissed in default.
By order dated 21.04.2006, the Single Judge dismissed the appellants writ petition and affirmed the Award of the Labour Court.
In substance, the Appellate Court upheld the respondents termination order.
During the pendency of the civil suit, he also approached to the State Labour Commissioner and prayed for making Industrial Reference to the companycerned Labour Court under Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Act for deciding the legality and propriety of his termination order.
The Labour Commissioner made an Industrial Reference No.166 of 1992 to the Labour Court No.
The appellant State felt aggrieved, filed writ petition Special Civil Application No.8390/2006 before the High Court of Gujarat.
Heard Ms. Jesal Wahi, learned companynsel for the appellants and Mr. Purvish Jitendra Malkan, learned companynsel for the respondent.
2 at Bhavnagar for deciding the legality and companyrectness of the termination order and for regularization of respondents services.
The Labour Court, however, by Award dated 01.02.2006 Annexure P 9 answered the Reference in respondents favour.
The respondent felt aggrieved of his termination and initiated two actions against the appellant.
The Appellate Court, by order dated 30.09.2003, allowed the appellants appeal, set aside the judgment decree of the Trial Court and dismissed the respondents civil suit.
The appellant applied for restoration of the Letters Patent Appeal but it was dismissed and hence this appeal by special leave was filed by the State before this Court against the order of the Division Bench as also against the order of the Single Judge.
The Labour Court accordingly directed the appellant State to re instate the respondent in service along with payment of 40 back wages.
The 2nd Joint Civil Judge SD , Bhavnagar, vide judgment decree dated 03.05.1994 decreed the respondents suit, set aside the termination order and directed the appellant State to re instate the respondent in service with all companysequential benefits.
The appellant is the Panchayat Department of State of Gujarat having its office at Bhavnagar.
In the first instance, challenging his termination order dated 23.03.1992 from the services, the respondent filed Civil Suit No.141 of 1992 in the Civil Court at Bhavnagar.
The respondent Satish Kantilal Amrelia worked in the appellants Revenue Department at Bhavnagar as a Peon cum Driver on daily wages from 18.12.1989 to 31.05.1990 5 months 15 days and then started giving his services again as daily wager in appellants another branch Small Saving from 01.06.1990 to 12.02.1992 1 year 9 months on daily payment of Rs.27.55 Rs.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Leave granted.
These appeals are filed against the final judgment and order dated 01.12.2014 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Civil Application No.10519 of 2014 in Letters Patent Signature Not Verified Appeal No.1878 of 2006, wherein the High Court Digitally signed by DEEPAK MANSUKHANI Date 2017.11.28 130638 IST Reason dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellant herein in default and further declined to restore the appeal when prayed by the appellant.
The respondents tenure was then discontinued with effect from 12.02.1992 vide order dated 23.03.1992 Annexure P 4 .
Having gone through the entire record of the case and further keeping in view the nature of factual companytroversy, findings of the Labour Court, the manner in which the respondent fought this litigation on two fronts simultaneously, namely, one in Civil Court and the other in Labour Court in challenging his termination order and seeking regularization in service, which resulted in passing the two companyflicting orders one in respondents favour Labour Court and the other against him Civil Court and lastly, it being an admitted fact that the respondent was a daily wager during his short tenure, which lasted hardly two and half years approximately and companypled with the fact that 25 years has since been passed from the date of his alleged termination, we are of the companysidered opinion that the law laid down by this Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs. Bhurumal 2014 7 SCC 177 would aptly apply to the facts of this case and we prefer to apply the same for disposal of these appeals.
Having heard the learned companynsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeals in part and while setting aside the impugned orders Single Judge and Division Bench , modify the Award of the Labour Court as indicated below.
