EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. DILIPSINH C CHAVDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.S.Sinha, Chief Justice of the High Court of Gujarat has delivered the Speech on the occasion of the Inaugural Ceremony of the District Court Complex at Bharuch on Friday, the 11th October, 2002. Following paragraph of the speech of the Hon'ble Chief Justice which is relevant and important is reproduced as under:

(2.) Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. H.C. Patel for the petitioner and Mr. J.S. Brahmbhatt, learned advocate for the respondents. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Labour Court, Godhra in Miscellaneous Application NO. 30 of 1993 dated 15/01/1994 filed by the respondents which was allowed by the labour court with a direction to the petitioner to engage the respondents workmen as per the seniority and not to disturb and defeat their legal rights to receive any benefits and not to adopt unfair labour practice and to implement the Government Resolution dated 1 7/10/1988 by giving benefits thereof to the workmen, if at all the workmen are entitled for the benefits of the said Government Resolution.

(3.) Brief facts of the present petition are to the effect that the group of 18 workmen working under the petitioner approached the labour court, Godhra by filing application under section 25(T) relating to Chapter V of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It was the grievance of the respondents workmen that the establishment of the petitioner was adopting unfair labour practice and the petitioner has not been paying the benefits available to the respondents as per the Government Resolution dated 17/10/1988 and the petitioner establishment was also disturbing their seniority. Reply to the said application was filed by the petitioner at Exh. 5 before the labour court and the averments made by the workmen in the said application were denied by the petitioner, in response to the notice issued by the labour court. Thereafter, the matter was heard by the labour court. Before the labour court, no evidence was led by either side. In support of the application, an affidavit was filed by the workman at Exh. 2 and the contents of the said affidavit were not challenged by the petitioner before the labour court. Not only that, the petitioner has also not produced any documents for controverting the contentions raised by respondents in their application as well as the affidavit. Thus, before the labour court, except the application filed by the workmen, affidavit in support of the said application and the reply to the said application at Exh. 5, no other material was there.