BAGASARA NAGARPALIKA Vs. WORKERS OF BAGASARA NAGAR PALIKA C/O SECRETARY SAURASHTRA SH & ANR
LAWS(GJH)-2016-6-398
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on June 10,2016

Bagasara Nagarpalika Appellant
VERSUS
Workers Of Bagasara Nagar Palika C/O Secretary Saurashtra Sh And Anr Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 26.09.2012 passed by learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.11341 of 2001, the AppellantNagarpalika has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal, whereby the learned Single Judge modified the award by observing that the actual payment to the petitioners shall be made from 28.02.1990 i.e. from the date of reference instead of date of award i.e. 24.08.2000 as Ordered by the Tribunal.
(2.) The petitionerworkers of Bagasara Nagarpalika had challenged award and order dated 24.08.2000 passed in Reference (I.T.) No.80/93 by Industrial Tribunal, Bhavnagar, to the effect that they should be paid the arrears of wages from the date of initial entry in service instead of 24.08.2000, as ordered by the Tribunal. Further, they have challenged the restriction of "actual benefits" granted by the Tribunal from the date of award.
(3.) The preliminary contention raised by the appellantNagarpalika is that the award was implemented way back in 2001 i.e. on 08.10.2001, and any modification in the Award will grossly affect other employees. It is further submitted by Mr.M.B.Parikh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellantNagarpalika, that the notional benefit was granted to the one of the petitioners namely, Jayaben Hadiyal from the date of joining from 01.03.1978. He has further relied upon the Constitution Bench judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi and Ors., 2006 4 SCC 1 stating that the original petitioners were appointed purely on parttime - temporary basis without following due process and without any sanctioned post. So far as the case of the original petitioner No.1Shardaben J. Ganatra is concerned, he has stated that she has already retired on 05.01.1991 prior to filing of reference i.e. 28.02.1990, hence, she is not entitled to the benefits as observed by learned Single Judge. No further contention is raised.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.