IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20183 of 2015

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

MADAN RAMSINGH RATHOD....Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)

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

Appearance:

MR PH PATHAK, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1

Mr.Rashesh Rindani, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI

Date : 09/12/2015

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner herein was appointed on the post of Chowkidar in the year 1985. His services came to be terminated in the year 1999. Therefore, he was approached the Labour Court by preferring Reference (LCK) No. 329 of 1990 for reinstatement in service. The same was allowed and it was directed to be reinstated with full back-wages and all consequential benefits.

On 31st June, 2006, against the award of the Labour Court, the respondents moved Special Civil Application No. 6673 of 2002 wherein, this Court on 31st January 2006 confirmed the reinstatement and modified the order of back-wages.

The petitioner had approached the Appellate Forum by preferring Letters Patent Appeal No. 1184 of 2006. On the ground that the Labour Court had not been impleaded as party respondent in wake of decision of Division Bench of this Court rendered in case of Revaben w/o Ambalal Motibhai and Ors Vs. Vinubhai Purshottambhai Patel and others, reported in 2013 (1) GLH, 440, the same was not entertained.

Thereafter, he preferred Misc. Civil Application (For contempt) No. 2251 of 2013 for continuity of service. The Court was of the opinion that in the contempt of court proceedings, the issue of continuity of service cannot be gone into and passed the following order :-

"4. We are of the view that such aspects cannot be gone into under the Contempt of Courts Act and at this stage, Mr. Pathak for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not raising the said grievance in the present proceeding but will file substantive petition for such purpose. Hence, we leave the said aspects at that stage to be examined in accordance with law.

7. We find that when it is not in dispute that the award for reinstatement is maintained but the reinstatement was actually not effected, reinstatement will

have to be considered after the expiry of the period of one month from the date of the award and whatever the wages revised and may be revised subsequently until the actual reinstatement as such would be payable but the respondent shall be at liberty to deduct the amount already paid to the applicant under section 17B of the ID Act. Hence, we direct the respondent to pay the said difference on or before 16.1.2014."

Clarification Application was preferred being Misc. Civil Application (For Direction ) No. 50 of 2014 in Special Civil Application NO. 6673 of 2002 which was permitted to be withdrawn with a view to move appropriate petition on 22nd August, 2014.

Now, the petitioner has preferred the present petition seeking the continuity of service and benefits of the GR dated 17.10.2012 .

Issue Notice returnable on 15th January, 2016. Mr.Rashesh Rindani, learned AGP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondent No.1 -State.

(MS SONIA GOKANI, J.)

BINA