Supreme Court orders reinstatement of watchman after 20 yrs

“In such circumstances, the denial of backwages, has resulted in punishing him, although the delay is attributable to the judicial process. However, the respondent management cannot be absolved of the primary responsibility in its litigative proclivity,” the bench observed in its order. The SC bench noted that Jadeja could have not been made to suffer “on account of the management’s obdurate attempt to have the relief set aside”.

Jadeja was appointed in 1992 as “chokidar” by the Kutch district panchayat with a monthly salary of Rs ,2400, and was last working in the same position at Shirai Dam in Mundra Taluka. His service was terminated by the management in December 2002, which, as per Jadeja, was done without following due process. Jadeja had alleged during the litigation at the lower court that his demand for seniority, for making him a permanent employee and for increasing his salary, had prompted the termination.

He moved a Bhuj labour court challenging his termination in 2003 and the court in 2010 had ordered for Jadeja’s reinstatement with continuity of service without back wages of the interim period. Before the labour court, Jadeja had submitted that the management did not maintain any seniority list and that employees junior to him were retained.

On the other hand, the panchayat had submitted that Jadeja had been out of employment for over 20 years and in such circumstances, “directing reinstatement was not in the interest of justice.”

The labour court’s order of reinstatement was challenged before the Gujarat HC by the management in 2011 wherein a single-judge court had upheld the labour court’s verdict and dismissed the district panchayat’s petition. However the district panchayat management had appealed against the order before a division bench of the Gujarat HC in 2011.

A division bench first dismissed the petition in 2014 without going into the merits, following which the district panchayat moved SC in 2016 which remitted the matter back to HC for fresh consideration. Upon reconsideration by a division bench of the HC, the labour court’s order and the single judge bench of HC’s orders were set aside in 2021.

The court had however directed the panchayat to pay a lumpsum amount of Rs 1 lakh to Jadeja. The SC bench in its verdict observed that the HC’s order for payment of Rs 1 lakh was “not warranted in the circumstances of this case” as a substitute to the relief of reinstatement.