EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. RUPSINHBHAI BANESINHBHAI CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate Mr. Dharshan V. Shah appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned advocate Mr. P.H. Pathak appearing on behalf of the respondents as a caveator.

(2.) In these two petitions, a common award in respect to both the respondents passed by the Labour Court, Surendranagar in Reference (L.C.S.) No.144 of 2005 dated 20.2.2006 is challenged by the petitioners. The Labour Court has set aside the termination order and granted reinstatement with continuity of service without back wages of the interim period.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Shah submitted that both the workmen admitted the negligence before the concerned authority and before passing the order of dismissal, show cause notice was served to the respondents by the petitioners. Both the respondents have filed reply disputing the statement of admission made before the concerned authority. The said reply was given by the advocate on behalf of both the respondents. Learned advocate Mr. Shah further submitted that preliminary inquiry was conducted by the concerned officer and thereafter considering the reply, termination order was passed. Learned advocate Mr. Shah further submitted that both the respondents were recruited de-hors the recruitment rules, therefore, their appointment is null and void and they are not entitled for any legal right to the said post. He also submitted that Section 25-F is also not applicable. He relied upon one decision of this Court in case of Karjan Municipality Vs. Shashikant Kamlakar Shukla reported in 2004 G.L.H.(3) 23. Relying on the said decision, the submission is made that temporary / daily wage employees, whose appointments are without following the due procedure, have no right to be continued and must be relieved. He also submitted that notice pay was paid and compensation also paid to the respondents. He submitted that in pursuance to the criminal complaint, the criminal case is pending before the competent Court. Except this, Mr. Shah has not made any other submission and relied upon any decision.