STATE OF GUJARATversusRAMESHBHAI GOVINDBHAI VARLI

     C/SCA/14200/2021                              JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14200 of 2021
                                   With
               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14309 of 2021
                                   With
               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14310 of 2021
                                   With
               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14311 of 2021

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================================

             Approved for Reporting               Yes          No

==========================================================
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
                                 Versus
                   BHANABHAI RAMABHAI DABHADIYA & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ROSHNI PATEL AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
DELETED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR P C CHAUDHARI(5770) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                              Date : 29/01/2026

                             ORAL JUDGMENT


1.       By way of present petitions under Articles 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, petitioners have challenged the impugned
awards passed by the Labour Court, Valsad in Recovery
Application Nos. 101 of 2015, 107 of 2015, 99 of 2015, 125 of
2015 respectively whereby, the petitioners were directed to pay
Rs. 80,560/- as well as Rs.3000/- as cost to the respondents
respectively.




                                  Page 1 of 3
     C/SCA/14200/2021                         JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




2.       Heard Ms. Roshni Patel, learned AGP for the petitioners and
Mr. P C Chaudhari, learned counsel for the respondent.


3.       Ms. Patel, learned AGP for the petitioners has submitted
that impugned awards passed by the Labour Court is erroneous,
illegal, unjust, arbitrary to the facts and material on record and
the provisions of the Act and therefore, is required to be quashed
and set aside. She has submitted that the Labour Court has erred
in reaching to the conclusion that the respondents were entitled
to receive accrued amount for the duration of the period served
by them. She has submitted that the Labour Court should have
considered the fact that the respondents had been paid all the
benefits due to them for the services rendered and that they are
not entitled to receive any benefits under GR 15.09.2014 or GR
17.10.1988. She has submitted that the Labour Court has
overreached its jurisdiction by granting the benefit of leave
encashment and other benefits but there is no any provision for
benefit of leave encashment to the daily wagers in the GR dated
17.10.1988 as well as the direction of the Hon’ble Apex Court
dated 09.07.2013. She has submitted that the Labour Court
appears to have overreached its jurisdiction by adjudicating the
recovery applications under section 33C(2) of the said Act. She
has submitted that the Labour Court while exercising its
jurisdiction under Section 33C(2) of the Act appears to have
computed the amount pending of the respondents and
accordingly awarded the same in the impugned awards. It is the
case of the petitioner that this authority is not provided for and
permissible under section 33C(2) of the Act and the same cannot
be done by the Labour Court. Over and above the grounds
agitated in the memo of petition, learned AGP Ms. Patel has

                                Page 2 of 3
     C/SCA/14200/2021                                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




urged that the impugned judgment and awards passed by the
Labour Court is required to be quashed and set aside and the
present petitions are required to be allowed.


4.       Though various grounds have been raised in the memo of
petition, the fact remains that the total amount involved in the
petition is only Rs. 80,560/-. Considering the smallness of
amount, this Court deems it fit not to exercise jurisdiction under
Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly,
without entering into the merits of the matter, only on the
ground of smallness of amount with a further clarification that
this may not be considered as precedent in other matters, the
petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.


5.       If the amount is not deposited by the petitioner, the same
shall be deposited within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of order of this Court. Once the amount is deposited,
the same shall be disbursed in favour of the respondents, after
verifying the bank details and after following due procedure,
through RTGS/NEFT.



                                                              (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
ANUSRI

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/01/2026 17:17:15




                                                Page 3 of 3