CHANCHIBEN SHIVABHAI WAGHELA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.H. Pathak, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Keyur Vyas, learned advocate for respondent no. 2.

(2.) In these petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the awards of the Labour Court are under challenge in which the Labour Court taking into consideration delay of 13 years in raising the dispute has awarded compensation rather than reinstatement.

(3.) Mr. Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioners relying on the papers of Special Civil Application No. 5622 of 2020 would submit that from the terms of reference, it was evident that the workman was working as a Safai Kamdar since the year 1985 and was terminated with effect from 15/2/1997. He would take the court through the reasonings advanced by the Labour Court awarding compensation rather than reinstatement. Assailing the award of the Labour Court, it is his contention that though having come to a specific positive finding that the termination was in violation of provisions of Sec. 25F and having also found that there was violation of Sec. 25G and N, the Labour Court committed material error in restricting the relief only to compensation rather than awarding reinstatement and or moulding the relief for backwages and or continuity of service. He would further submit that once the Labour Court had condoned the delay in initiating the reference it was not open for the court to otherwise take into consideration the delay of 13 years and deny reinstatement.