ARVINDBHAI KESHAVLAL CHHAG Vs. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs,

(2.) Heard learned advocate, Mr. M.H. Rathod for the petitioner, learned advocate, Mr. G.M. Amin for the respondent nos.1 to 3 and learned AGP Mr. Rohan Shah for the respondent no.4.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was working as Driver being skilled daily wager employee with the respondent nos.1 to 3 w.e.f. October, 1982 and during his service period as a daily wager driver, he was driving Jeep and Tanker. It is submitted that however the service of the petitioner was terminated in May, 1984 without following due procedure as contemplated under the provision of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as " ID Act ") and, therefore, the petitioner raised industrial dispute, which was referred to the concerned Labour Court, Junagadh. It is submitted that the concerned Labour Court, after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence placed before it, passed an award dtd. 29/5/2000 and thereby the present respondent - Panchayat was directed to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and 50% backwages was also awarded. It is submitted that the present respondent - Panchayat challenged the said award by filing petition being Special Civil Application No.12880/2000 before this Court. It is further submitted that this Court, by an order dtd. 26/7/2010, partly allowed the said petition and thereby quashed and set aside the award of the learned Labour Court qua the backwages only. It is further submitted that in the meantime, the petitioner has retired from the service and, therefore, the order of reinstatement was not passed, however, this Court has specifically observed that the continuity of service of the present petitioner shall be granted from the date of Reference i.e. from the year 1993. It was also observed by this Court that since the present petitioner has retired, retirement dues pursuant to the said order shall be paid to the present petitioner. At this stage, it is submitted that the present respondent - District Panchayat has not challenged the said order passed by the learned Single Judge by filing Letters Patent Appeal and, therefore, the aforesaid order dtd. 26/7/2010 has attained finality.