Allowed

Jupiter Textile Mills v. Harshadbhai Kantilal Bhatt

Gujarat HC5 Aug 2005SCA/3000/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat modified an Industrial Court order in a service dispute concerning a badli worker's termination. The Court quantified back wages to a lump sum of Rs. 35,000, capping total entitlement at Rs. 55,837/-, directed issuance of a cheque from the deposited amount, and ordered refund of the surplus to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Back wages quantified as a lump sum of Rs. 35,000; total relief fixed at Rs. 55,837/-; cheque of Rs. 55,837.15 issued to respondent; balance refunded to petitioner.

Jupiter Textile Mills Vs Harshadbhai Kantilal… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Gujarat HC (2005)

¶1

SCA/3000/20041/7

¶2

JUDGMENT

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶4

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3000 of 2004

¶5

For Approval and Signature:

¶6

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

¶7

========================================= =

¶8

1^{Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed} to see the judgment ?

¶9

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

¶10

3^{Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy} of the judgment ?

¶11

Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the 4 constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

¶12

5^{Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge} ?

¶13

=========================================

¶14

¶15

JUPITER TEXTILE MILLS - Petitioner(s)

¶16

Versus

¶17

HARSHADBHAI KANTILAL BHATT - Respondent(s)

¶18

=========================================

¶19

¶20

Appearance :

¶21

NANAVATI & NANAVATIfor Petitioner No(s).: 1.
MR TR MISHRAfor Respondent No(s).: 1.
MR DS CHAUHAN for Respondent No(s).: 1.

¶22

==================================================================

¶23

CORAM :HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

¶24

Date : 05/08/2005

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

1.In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

¶27

Constitution of India, the petitioner mill company has
challenged the legality and validity of the common

¶28

SCA/3000/20042/7JUDGMENT

¶29

order passed by the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad dated
28.7.2003 passed in Appeal (IC) No.108/2002 and 5/2003
by which the Industrial Court has dismissed the Appeal
No.5/2003 preferred by the petitioner company and
partly allowed the Appeal No.108/2002 preferred by the
respondent workman.

¶30

2.The respondent workman, who was serving with the
petitioner company had approached the Labour Court,
Ahmedabad by way of 'T' Application No.458/1989 under
the provision of Bombay Industrial Relations Act
challenging his alleged termination w.e.f. 29.7.1989.
It was the contention on behalf of the respondent
workman that he was serving with the petitioner mill
company since 28th March, 1978 in the third shift and as
the third shift was closed and all the employees, who
were serving in the third shift were to be accommodated
in the first shift and second shift. However, after
accommodating him in other shift, all of a sudden
orally the workman was informed not to come on duty
w.e.f. 29.7.1989. The Labour Court, after hearing all

¶31

the concerned parties, declared the action of the
petitioner company in not giving him the work and
orally terminating his service as illegal. However, in
view of the fact that the mill company was already

¶32

SCA/3000/2004

¶33

3/7

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

closed and that the respondent workman was serving as a
Badli Worker, it did not pass any order with regard to

¶36

the backwages. However, directed to give all the

¶37

benefits available to the respondent workman from the
date of termination till the company was closed, as per
seniority. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
judgment and award passed by the Labour Court,
Ahmedabad dated 17.8.2002, the petitioner preferred
appeal (IC) No.5/2003 and the respondent workman
challenged the judgment and award passed by the Labour
Court in not granting any backwages from the date of

¶38

termination till the closure being Appeal (IC)
No.108/2002. Both the appeals came to be heard by the
Industrial Court and the Industrial Court by common
judgment and order dated 28.7.2003 partly allowed the
appeal preferred by the respondent workman by directing
the petitioner to pay the wages to the respondent
workman for the period between 29.7.1989 to September,

¶39

1992 to be calculated on the basis of 20 days wages per
month and also further directed the petitioner to pay
all other benefits available to the respondent workman

¶40

as per seniority till the mill company was closed and
dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common order passed
by the Industrial Court, Ahmedabad dated 28.7.2003

¶41

SCA/3000/20044/7JUDGMENT

¶42

passed in Appeal (IC) No.108/2002 and 5/2003 the
petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil
Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India.

¶43

3.Number of submissions have been made on behalf of the

¶44

learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties in
support of the judgment and order passed by the
Industrial Court as well as against judgment and award
passed by the Industrial Court impugned in the present
Special Civil Application. However, the learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has
fairly conceded that considering the length of service
of the respondent workman, the respondent workman would
be entitled to Rs.3,334/-towards Earned Leave and

¶45

Rs.17,503/-towards Gratuity. He has also further
submitted that if the wages to be paid as per the
judgment and award passed by the Industrial Court the

¶46

same would be Rs.52,700/- being 20 days of the wages
per month. It is also further submitted that pursuant

¶47

to the order passed by this Court dated 28.9.2004, an

¶48

amount of Rs.73,537.15 ps. is already deposited by the
petitioner with this Court, which is the amount due and
payable to the respondent workman as per the judgment
and award passed by the Industrial Court.

¶49

SCA/3000/2004

¶50

5/7

¶51

JUDGMENT

¶52

4.Shri T.R.Mishra, learned advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent workman while supporting the judgment

¶53

and award passed by the Industrial Court has submitted

¶54

that as such though the petitioner was a Badli Worker,
considering the number of days on which the work was
being offered to the respondent workman as well as
other Badli Workers, the Industrial Court has rightly
directed to pay the wages from the date of termination
till the date of closure i.e. September, 1992
considering 20 days of working. However, to put an end

¶55

to the entire controversy, he has left it to the Court

¶56

as to the amount of backwages to be paid to the
respondent workman. In response to the same, learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has also

¶57

left it to the Court as to the amount to be paid to
the respondent workman towards the backwages from the

¶58

date of termination i.e. 29.7.1989 till September,
1992. Considering the fact that the respondent workman

¶59

was serving since 1978 and considering the finding of

¶60

fact given by both the Courts below, this Court is of

¶61

the opinion that it will be in the fitness of things to

¶62

award lump sum amount towards the backwages for the
aforesaid interrugnum period, which is quantified at
Rs.35,000/- over and above the amount which the

¶63

SCA/3000/2004

¶64

6/7

¶65

JUDGMENT

¶66

respondent workman is entitled to such as Earned Leave

¶67

and Gratuity. Thus, the respondent workman would be
entitled to in all Rs.55,837/-. Accordingly, the
judgment and order passed by the Industrial Court,
Ahmedabad dated 28.7.2003 passed in Appeal (IC)
No.108/2002 and 5/2003 are modified to the aforesaid
extent. As stated hereinabove, the petitioner has
already deposited Rs.73,537.15 ps., which is lying with
this Court. Therefore, Registry is directed to issue an
Account Payee Cheque for an amount of Rs.55,837.15 ps.
in favour of the respondent workman and the balance
amount be refunded to the petitioner by Account Payee
Cheque as early as possible but not later than 15th
September, 2005.

¶68

5.Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent, however, there will be no order as to costs.

¶69

(M.R.SHAH, J.)

¶70

kdc.

¶71

SCA/3000/20047/7JUDGMENT

Jupiter Textile Mills v. Harshadbhai Kantilal Bhatt

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jupiter Textile Mills v. Harshadbhai Kantilal Bhatt

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Natwarlal Bhagwanji Bhatt Vs Superintendent-Govt.Hospital

Dy.Executive Engineer Vs Vadansinh Magansinh Makwana

Dy.Executive Engineer Vs Dhirajbhai Premjibhai Vora

Shivpal Gajadharprasad Vs Manager, a'Bad New Cotton Millcompany NO.2

Muljibhai Dahyabhai Vs Manager, a'Bad New Cotton Millcompany NO.2

Ghanshyam Hardas Vs Manager, a'Bad New Cotton Millcompany NO.2