STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KALIDAS KUBERBHAI MACHHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Gujarat, through the Executive Engineer to the Civil Store, Irrigation Sub Division No. 24 at Rajpipla, District : Narmada, has challenged the award passed by the Labour Court, Bharuch, in Reference (LCB) No. 25/1990, which was the new number given to the earlier Reference bearing No. Reference (LCV) No. 378/1984. The learned Judge, by the impugned award, directed the present petitioner to reinstate three persons, namely, Kalidas Kuberbhai Machhi, Bachubhai Chhaganbhai Vasava and Kanchanbhai Amrabhai Vasava, on their original posts with 40% back-wages and also costs of Rs. 250.00 to the applicants of that Reference. 2.

(2.) petitioner, invited the attention of the Court to the fact that written statement was filed before the Court below by Exh.11, in which it was specifically pleaded that the respondents-workmen were daily wager Chowkidars at the rate of Rs. 9-90 ps. per day for discharging their duties during night. It is the case of the petitioner that on 7/1/1982, when these three workmen were on duty as Chowkidars at the Store, a theft of a truck load of iron bars had taken place from the Store Compound. It is the case of the petitioner that when these three chowkidars were on duty and the theft is committed, an inference can be drawn that they are not vigilant in discharging their duties and therefore, their services were terminated with effect from 21/5/1982. It is also the case of the petitioner that while the respondents-workmen were on duty as night Watchmen, theft was committed in their presence and there is no material to show that they had tried to stop the commission of the said theft and therefore, it can be said that they have not discharged their duties diligently and therefore, their services were terminated.

(3.) The learned Judge, while considering the case of the respondents-workmen, has given undue weightage to the fact that the person, who was examined on behalf of the Department, namely, one Deputy Engineer, Navinchandra Pursottambhai Chauhan, deposed on 3/7/1986 that, "the respondent-workmen were employed as night Watchmen at the rate of Rs. 9-90 ps. per day". He has narrated the incident, as was mentioned in the written statement, during the cross-examination. The said witness has further deposed that, "He does not have any personal knowledge of this case"; "He is not in possession of any papers of the police complaint against the respondents-workmen"; and "No notice was given to the respondents-workmen or no amount was paid to them". From the deposition of the said witness, the learned Judge has drawn the conclusion that, "The respondents-workmen were not given any opportunity to defend themselves and that is in violation of the principles of natural justice and that the Department has not conducted any departmental inquiry against them". The learned Judge has also recorded a finding solely on the basis of the case of the respondents-workmen that, "he was serving for more than three years" and that, "the workmen had been working for more than 240 days". Not only that the learned Judge has also observed that, "as the present petitioner has not produced the muster roll of the respondents-workmen, there is a reason to believe that the respondents-workmen has worked for more than 240 days in every year".