LAKSHMANSINH DALABHAI PATEL Vs. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the captioned group of petitions arise out of a common award and the facts are also analogous, the same are decided by this common judgment and order. The workmen have challenged the award to the extent of granting reinstatement instead of compensation, whereas the BSNL has challenged the award of granting compensation.

(2.) The Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ahmedabad has directed the authorities of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) to pay the amount of Rs.1,00,000.00 as a lump-sum compensation to the workmen by setting aside their termination of service. All the workmen were appointed in the year 1985 and were conferred the benefits of Temporary Regular Mazdoor (TRM) on 1/10/1989. It is pertinent to note that after their appointment in the year 2000 the Department of Telecommunication, under which they were appointed, was converted into a public company viz. BSNL and their service from the Department of Telecommunication was shifted to BSNL. The workmen were issued a show-cause notice on 13/8/2001 alleging that the Muster Roll with regard to their service from 1/1/1985 to 31/7/1988 produced in the year 1991 was incorrect and false. The workmen replied to the aforesaid show-cause notice however, nothing was done and a second show-cause notice was issued on 27/1/2004 alleging some illegality. The workmen accordingly replied that the Muster Rolls were verified and counter signed by the concerned officer namely, K.M.Bariya and M.I.Patel and after verification of the Muster Roll, they were conferred the status of Temporary Regular Mazdoor and further regularized as Regular Mazdoor after expiry of three years. The respondent authority again issued the same notice on 13/4/2004, which was replied by the workmen on 25/6/2004 denying all the allegations. Ultimately, the notice dtd. 30/6/2006 was issued to the workmen purporting to terminate the service after a period of one (01) month from the date of notice. The show-cause notice issued against the petitioner was challenged before the Central Administration Tribunal, Ahmedabad (CAT) by filing original applications however, the same were disposed of on the ground that it does not have jurisdiction to deal with these matters. Being aggrieved by the order of the CAT, Ahmedabad, the workmen along with other employees approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application No.12965 of 2007 and by the order dtd. 10/9/2008, this Court has set aside the order of the Tribunal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Dipak Dave appearing on behalf of the workmen has submitted that the workmen have been terminated, without holding an inquiry on the ground of illegality and irregularity despite the fact that in their reply, they have asserted that the Muster Rolls were verified and counter-signed by the concerned officers K.M.Bariya and M.I.Patel and after a period of more than 15 years, the BSNL has issued show-cause notice questioning such Muster Rolls. He has submitted that in the written submissions as well as in the oral submissions before the Tribunal, no permission was sought for from the Tribunal to conduct the departmental proceedings or to lead evidence and in absence of the same, the Tribunal has precisely held that the said termination is illegal however, by granting the compensation to the workmen, the Tribunal has fallen in error since the workmen would be deprived of all the compensation benefits as they were the members of such scheme. It is submitted that no oral evidence to reverse the assertion made by the workmen with regard to the Muster Roll was led by the BSNL. Learned advocate has further submitted that the petitioners were conferred the temporary status in the year 1989, after going through the Muster Rolls. It is submitted that the Muster Rolls are not doubted by the BSNL. Neither it has been examined whether the Muster Rolls with regard to their presence were in fact forged or fake. Thus, he has submitted that the impugned award may be modified to the extent directing the BSNL to reinstate the workmen in the service. With regard to the petitioner - Bharatbhai Mathurbhai Patel (Special Civil Application No.22505 of 2019), learned advocate has submitted that he has already crossed the age of superannuation and hence, appropriate orders may be passed directing the authorities to pay him retirement benefits.