SHRI MUNI. ARTS AND URBAN BANK SCIENCE COLLEGEversusGOVINDBHAI NATHABHAI RATHOD

     C/SCA/14150/2023                            ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

         R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14150 of 2023

==========================================
       SHRI MUNI. ARTS AND URBAN BANK SCIENCE COLLEGE
                               Versus
             GOVINDBHAI NATHABHAI RATHOD & ANR.
==========================================
Appearance:
MR ANIL D TRIVEDI(5836) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR BHUNESH C RUPERA(3896) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS BHAVIKA H KOTECHA(2942) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                          Date : 02/02/2026

                            ORAL ORDER


1.     Present petition is 昀椀led by the petitioner - employer under
Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the
impugned award dated 05.05.2023 passed in Reference [L.C.M] Case
No. 117      of 2009 by the learned Presiding O昀케cer, Labour Court,
Mehsana (hereinafter be referred to as “the Labour Court”) whereby
the Labour Court has allowed the reference and directed the
petitioner to reinstate the respondent - workman with 20% back
wages, continuity of service and other service bene昀椀ts.


2.     It was the case of the workman that the workman was
appointed as sweeper in the year 1999 and initially he was getting
monthly salary of Rs.500/- subsequently the same was increased to
Rs.1500/- then Rs.1700/- and in the year 2007, his salary was 昀椀xed at



                               Page 1 of 5
      C/SCA/14150/2023                            ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026




Rs.2500/- per month and thereafter, the workman was orally
terminated from the service without any reason.


2.1     The workman had preferred aforesaid reference case before the
Labour Court, which came to be allowed and directed the petitioner to
reinstate the workman with 20% back wages, continuity of service
and other service bene昀椀ts.


3.      Being aggrieved and dissatis昀椀ed with the impugned award, the
petitioner has preferred the present petition.


4.      Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and leaned counsel for
the respondent – workman at length. Perused the material available
on record.


5.      Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted the same facts
which are narrated in the memo of petition and has further submitted
that the Labour Court has committed an error in allowing the
reference. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
workman had failed to prove that he had completed 240 days in a
preceding year and directed the employer to reinstate the employee
with continuity of service with 20% back wages. Learned counsel for
the petitioner has also submitted that the employee was not
appointed after following due process of law and he was daily wager
and, therefore, there is no any breach of Section 25B of the Industrial
Disputes Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted
that as per the settled principle of law and the decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court as well as this Court, the employee is not entitled for
back wages. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the
petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned award deserves to

                                Page 2 of 5
     C/SCA/14150/2023                               ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026




be quashed and set aside.

6.     Learned counsel for the respondent – workman has objected the
petition and submitted that the Labour Court has not committed any
error in passing the impugned award. Learned counsel for the
respondent – workman has submitted that the award passed by the
Labour Court is in consonance with the settled legal principle and,
therefore, there is no interference is required to be called for. Learned
counsel for the respondent – workman has submitted that the
workman had worked for more than ten years, however, his service
was abruptly terminated by the petitioner without there being any
reason or valid ground. Learned counsel for the respondent –
workman has submitted that the action on the part of the petitioner
itself is bad in law and violative of principles of natural justice and also
committed breach of Section 25(F), (G) and (H) of the Industrial
Disputes Act. Learned counsel for the respondent – workman has
submitted that the award passed by the Labour Court deserves to be
con昀椀rmed and no interference is required to be called for.


7.     In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Maharashtra          State   Cooperative     Marketing       Federation
Limited Versus Suresh S/o Dadarao Gadge reported in (2015) 4
SCC 542 and the oral order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the Division
Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 908 of 2023 and
allied appeals more particularly para – 10, this Court is of the
opinion that if this Court passes the order of reinstatement for daily
wager, is not just and proper and, therefore, considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that instead of
con昀椀rming the award passed by the Labour Court, it is sub-serve the
interest of justice, if the order of lump sum amount of compensation


                                  Page 3 of 5
     C/SCA/14150/2023                                 ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026




be passed in favour of the workman as full and 昀椀nal settlement. I am
of the considered opinion that the impugned award passed by the
Labour Court is required to be modi昀椀ed to the extent.


8.     The relevant para – 10 of the oral order dated 18.04.2024
passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal
No. 908 of 2023 and allied appeals reads thus:-

        “10. Having come to the conclusion that the lump sum
        compensation would be appropriate remedy for the families
        of the deceased workmen, the other aspects which comes
        for consideration is quantum of lump sum compensation.
        Though learned advocate Mr. Bhatt has contended that
        there was delay in preferring the complaint and the
        subsequent reference, it can be observed from the
        pleadings that the averments with regard to delay and
        laches in preferring the reference were not made before the
        labour court as well as the learned Single Judge. Therefore,
        the argument of learned advocate Mr. Bhatt with regard to
        delay and laches in preferring reference cannot be
        countenanced and what needs to be seen is that almost all
        the workmen have put in 16-20 years of service for the
        respondent and their services were terminated without
        following due procedure of law. Therefore, the families of
        the deceased workmen needs to be compensated
        proportionally as to the number of years of service put in by
        them. However, in order to balance the equation, we have
        considered to give e昀昀ect of delay in preferring the reference
        while enhancing the amount of compensation. Thus, while
        calculating the number of years of services, we proposed to
        deduct the number of years service for which there is delay
        in preferring reference. After deduction of such number of
        service, we propose to give compensation in the following
        tabular form:


          Sr.No. Total no. of years for lump    Amount of lump sum
                    sum compensation              compensation
             1          5 to 10 years              Rs.3.00 lacs
             2          10-15 years                Rs.5.00 lacs
             3          15-20 years                 Rs.7.5 lacs


                                  Page 4 of 5
          C/SCA/14150/2023                                                                ORDER DATED: 02/02/2026




 9.          Now, considering the materials placed on record and the
 peculiar facts of this case, this Court is of the opinion that instead of
 granting any back wages and reinstatement in service as prayed for,
 it would be just and proper to pay lump sum compensation of
 Rs.3,00,000/- to the workman, which will serve the ends of justice.

 10.         With the aforesaid conclusion, the petition stands allowed in
 part. The impugned award passed by the Labour Court is hereby
 quashed and set aside and the award is modi昀椀ed accordingly. An
 amount of Rs.3,00,000/- as lump sum compensation shall be paid to
 the workman by the employer after proper veri昀椀cation of the identity
 and bank details through RTGS within a period of eight weeks from
 the date of receipt of the writ of this order. There shall be no order as
 to costs.

                                                                       (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
 V.R. PANCHAL


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: VIJAYKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PANCHAL(HC00171), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 04/02/2026 17:27:39




                                                           Page 5 of 5