STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. DEENANJI GIDHAJI THAKORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-State of Gujarat, by this Letters Patent Appeal, has challenged the judgment and order dated 9th April, 2002, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court (Coram: D.H. Waghela, J.) in Special Civil Application No.8913 of 2001.

(2.) The respondent-workman was working in the Irrigation Department of the State of Gujarat as Chowkidar, on daily wage basis. His services were terminated on 15.2.1999, on the ground that no work was available. He, therefore, raised an industrial dispute which, ultimately, was referred to the Labour Court, Kalol, registered as Reference (LCK) No.330 of 1999. The Labour Court, by its award dated 15.9.2000, set aside the order of termination of the respondent-workman and ordered to reinstate the workman in service with all other benefits, except back wages. 2.1 The aforesaid award passed by the Labour Court was challenged by the appellant-State of Gujarat before this Court by way of Special Civil Application No.8913 of 2001. Before the learned Single Judge of this Court, a specific contention was raised that the workman was working in the Irrigation Department of the State of Gujarat, which is not an "industry", therefore, the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the Reference and pass award in favour of the respondent-workman. In support of the said contention, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Executive Engineer (State of Karnataka) v. K. Somasetty & Ors., reported in (1997) 5 SCC 434. However, the learned Single Judge of this Court, in absence of any such contention raised before the Labour Court, refused to consider the same for the first time in his writ jurisdiction and dismissed the writ petition. This has been challenged in this Letters Patent Appeal by the appellant-State of Gujarat.

(3.) Learned Assistant Government Pleader, Shri Pancholi, appearing for the appellant-State of Gujarat, vehemently, submitted that the learned Single Judge committed an error in rejecting the contention raised by the appellant before him that the Irrigation Department of the State is not an "Industry", therefore, the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the Reference and pass the award. He submitted that when a neat question of jurisdiction was raised before the learned Single Judge of this Court in the writ petition, then, he should have permitted the appellant-State to raise it and decided the same in accordance with law. He submitted that the Honourable Supreme Court in case of K. Somasetty (supra), has held that Irrigation Department of the State Government cannot be said to be an "Indusry". He further submitted that, relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Somasetty's case (supra), Division Bench of this Court in case of Shankerji Chelaji Thakor v. State of Gujarat, 2000(1) GLH 482, also held that the Irrigation Department of the State Government is not an "Industry". He, therefore, submitted that this appeal be allowed and the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, i.e. Special Civil Application No.8913 of 2001, be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by the appellat-State be accepted and the impugned award passed by the Labour Court be quashed and set aside.