M/S. MADHU SILICA PVT. LTD.versusBAHADURBHAI HARJIBHAI CHAVDA

     C/SCA/16364/2025                               JUDGMENT DATED: 06/03/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16364 of 2025


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


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

             Approved for Reporting                Yes          No

=============================================================
                          M/S. MADHU SILICA PVT. LTD.
                                    Versus
                        BAHADURBHAI HARJIBHAI CHAVDA
=============================================================
Appearance:
MR DG SHUKLA(1998) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. KULDEEP D VAIDYA(7045) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=============================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                               Date : 06/03/2026

                                 JUDGMENT


1.       RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Kuldeep Vaidya, learned
counsel for the respondent waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the learned
counsels for the respective parties, the present petition is taken
up for !nal hearing today.


2.       Present petition is !led by the petitioner under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking following reliefs:




                                   Page 1 of 5
     C/SCA/16364/2025                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 06/03/2026




         “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari
         or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or direction
         quashing and setting aside the impugned Award dated
         23.05.2025 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bhavnagar in
         Reference (LCB) Case No.41 of 2009 as being illegal, unjust,
         without jurisdiction and without authority in law;


         (B) Pending hearing and .nal disposal of the present petition,
         Your Lordship may be pleased to grant the interim relief staying
         the impugned Award dated 23.05.2025 passed by the learned
         Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference (LCB) Case No.41 of
         2009;


         (C) An ex-parte ad interim relief in terms of paragraphs 9 (B)
         above may kindly be granted;


         (D) Any other and further reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may
         deem .t and proper in the circumstances of the case.”


3.       Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the
respondent workman was working with the petitioner Company
w.e.f. 15.10.2004 and he was issued notice to submit
explanation on 25.05.2005 to which he gave an explanation on
21.06.2005. That, the respondent workman had thereafter
stopped reporting for duties without any intimation and without
prior permission of his Superior O7cer. That, the respondent
had worked only for 151 days with the petitioner. That, the
respondent raised an industrial dispute after more than 3 years
and 8 months alleging that he was orally terminated from the
services from 01.06.2005 before the Assistant Commissioner of
Labour. That, the said industrial dispute came to be referred to
the Labour Court, Bhavnagar being Reference (L.C.B.) Case No.
41 of 2009 whereby, the Labour Court vide award dated
23.05.2025              directed   the     petitioner   to   pay      lump       sum

                                         Page 2 of 5
     C/SCA/16364/2025                       JUDGMENT DATED: 06/03/2026




compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- in lieu of reinstatement in
services with back wages along with cost of Rs.5,001/- to the
respondent.


4.       Being aggrieved and dissatis!ed with the impugned award
dated 23.05.2025 passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner has
preferred the present petition.


5.       Heard learned counsels Mr. DG Shukla and Mr. Harsheel
Shukla for the petitioner and Mr. Kuldeep Vaidya, learned
counsel for the respondent. Perused the materials available on
record.


6.       Learned counsel Mr. Shukla has submitted that the
impugned award passed by the Labour Court is illegal, unjust,
arbitrary, erroneous and contrary to the facts and material on
record and the provisions of the Act and therefore, is required to
be quashed and set aside. He has submitted that the Labour
Court did not consider the fact that the reference was !led by
the respondent after a delay of about 4 years and was thus,
barred by delay and laches. He has submitted that the
respondent has also not given any explanation regarding the
delay caused in raising the dispute after 4 years. He has
submitted that the Labour Court did not consider the fact that
the respondent had submitted in his Written Statement that he
had voluntarily abandoned the services and, therefore, it cannot
be said to be retrenchment from services. Over and above the
grounds agitated in the memo of petition, learned counsel Mr.
Shukla has urged that the impugned award passed by the Labour
Court is required to be quashed and set aside and the present

                              Page 3 of 5
     C/SCA/16364/2025                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/03/2026




petition is required to be allowed.


7.       As against that, learned counsel Mr. Vaidya, appearing for
the respondent-workman, has opposed the present petition and
submitted that there is no any in!rmity or any illegality in the
impugned award passed by the Labour Court and therefore, no
interference is required to be called for in the present petition.
He has submitted that the impugned award passed by the
Labour Court is in consonance with the settled principles of law
and is passed after following due procedure and therefore, the
same is required to be con!rmed and the present petition is
required to be dismissed and no interference is required to be
called for while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India.


8.       I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties and perused the material placed on record. I
have also considered the impugned award passed by the Labour
Court. Considering the submissions canvassed by both the sides,
I am of the opinion that the impugned award passed by the
Labour Court stands modi!ed to the extent that the respondent
shall be paid lump sum compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- in lieu of
Rs.3,00,000/- originally awarded by the Labour Court.


9.       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!ed
accordingly.            An   amount   of    Rs.2,00,000/-    as    lump       sum
compensation shall be paid to the workman by the employer
after proper veri!cation of the identity and bank details of the

                                      Page 4 of 5
        C/SCA/16364/2025                                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 06/03/2026




    workman through RTGS/NEFT within a period of 8 weeks from the
    date of receipt of the writ of this order. Rule is made absolute to
    the aforesaid extent.



                                                                  (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 11/03/2026 16:44:37




                                                   Page 5 of 5