GONDAL NAGARPALIKA Vs. KUSUMBEN RATILAL PANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of these petitions, the petitioner has prayed that to quash and set aside the judgment and award dated January 31, 2006 passed by the Labour Court, Rajkot, passed in Reference (LCR) Nos.161/2001, 166/2001, 167/2001, 243/2001 and 245/2001, whereby the Labour Court partly allowed the said References and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent-workmen with continuity of service and back wages.

(2.) THE matrix of the facts as culled out from the cases are that the petitioner-Nagarpalika's financial condition of is very poor and critical. The respondent-workmen were appointed as daily wagers in petitioner-Gondal Nagarpalika in Sanitary Department in different years between 1984 and 1997 on fixed wages of Rs.1200/- per month for a fixed period of time. The respondents were retrenched by the petitioner by oral order dated December 14, 2000. Against the said order, the respondent-workmen filed Reference Cases before the Labour Court. The Labour Court, after considering the evidence on record, passed the impugned award, as aforesaid. Hence, present petition.

(3.) INSOFAR as granting of back wages is concerned, in view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Ram Ashrey Singh v. Ram Bux Singh, reported in (2003) II L.L.J. 176, a workman has no automatic entitlement to back wages since it is discretionary and has to be dealt with in accordance with the facts and circumstances of each case. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the case of General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh, (2005) 5 SCC 591, wherein it has been held that an order for payment of back wages should not be passed in a mechanical manner, but a host of factors are to be taken into consideration before passing any such order. Thus, relying upon the aforesaid decisions of the Apex Court, I am of the opinion that the respondent is not entitled to any back wages and therefore, the award of the Labour Court granting back wages is unjust and improper and the same is required to be quashed and set aside.