FATMABAI ABDUL SUMRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions are filed by family members of the deceased-employee who at the relevant time was working as a daily wager and was subsequently granted the benefits of the resolution dtd. 17/10/1988. Prayers in both these petitions is to assail the action of the respondents in not granting the benefits of lump-sum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment as per the Government Resolutions dtd. 7/4/2016 and 5/7/2011. For the purposes of convenience, facts of Special Civil Application No. 12746 of 2021 are referred to.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner joined the service on 20/6/1988 as a daily wager. On completion of five years of service on 1/6/1993, the petitioner's husband was extended the beneftits of the Government Resolution dtd. 17/10/1988. He was also subsequently granted the benefits of the resolution on completion of ten and fifteen years respectively. All benefits available to permanent employees were granted to the husband of the petitoner. After haveing served for 28 years, the husband of the petitioner died on 4/10/2016. An application therefore was made on 13/7/2021 for grant of lumpsum compensation in accordance with the resolution dtd. 7/4/2016 and 5/7/2011. The same was rejected by a communication dtd. 20/7/2021 on the ground that the petitoiner shall not be entitled to benefit of lumpsum compensation in view of the fact that the husband of the petitioner was not a permanent employee and as per the resolution of 5/7/211 since he was a daily wager the benefits of resolution of 5/7/2011 read with 7/4/2016 cannot be granted.

(3.) Ms.Ashlesha Patel, learned advocate, would submit that the issue is no longer in the realm of a debate, in lieu of the judgment of this Court rendered in Special Civil Application No. 1795 of 2013 dtd. 7/10/2013. The aforesaid judgment was confirmed by the Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1234 of 2017, wherein, this court considering the decision in the case of State of Gujarat and Another vs. Mahendrakumar Bhagwandas & Anr reported in 2011 (2) GLR 1290, observed that it sounds absurd and baseless that an employee employed on daily wages can be rebranded as a 'permanent daily wager'. The court accordingly directed that the family of the deceased, daily wager, is entitled to the benefits of the reslution dtd. 5/7/2011.