LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/divisional-controller-shri-gujarat-state-road-transport-corporation-vs-the-president-vinayak-karmach-20241125/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Divisional Controller Shri Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation vs The President, Vinayak Karmachari Mandal

Court
Gujarat High Court
Date
25 November 2024
Case No.
R/Special Civil Application No. 3051 of 2022
Bench
Hon'ble Mrs. Justice M. K. Thakker
Acts & Sections
Constitution §227 Industrial Disputes Act §Not specified
Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The petitioner, Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, challenged an award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Jamnagar dated 18.08.2021 in Reference (IT) No. 16 of 2017, whereby the Tribunal granted the benefit of time-scale to the respondent-workman on completion of five years of service from the date of his original appointment on 30.07.2010, effective from 31.07.2015. The workman had been appointed as a driver-cum-conductor on 28.07.2010 on a fixed pay scale for the first five years, was terminated on 10.06.2011 for alleged misconduct without initiation of disciplinary proceedings, and was subsequently reinstated without back wages but with continuity of service pursuant to an earlier Labour Court award dated 08.01.2015.

The Corporation contended that under Clause 20 of a settlement arrived at between the parties, the benefit of time-scale was conditional upon availability of a post, and that continuity of service granted notionally for terminal benefits such as pension and gratuity could not extend to monetary benefits like time-scale increments. It relied upon the principle that in the absence of a specific direction for consequential benefits in the reinstatement award, no monetary benefit for the period of absence could be granted, citing decisions including Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Abdul Kareem and Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation v. Shivabasavegowda.

The respondent-workman opposed the petition, contending that the settlement relied upon by the Corporation was never placed before the Labour Court and could not be introduced at the supervisory jurisdiction stage, and that the appointment order expressly entitled the workman to time-scale upon completion of five years of service. The High Court was called upon to determine whether the Industrial Tribunal's award granting time-scale benefit was legally sustainable under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Catchwords: Industrial Disputes · time-scale benefit · reinstatement · continuity of service · fixed pay · driver-cum-conductor · GSRTC · back wages · consequential benefits · Industrial Tribunal · Article 227 · settlement under Industrial Disputes Act · terminal benefits · disciplinary proceedings

Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.

Full Judgment Text

[Cites 19, Cited by 0] Gujarat High Court Divisional Controller Shri Gujarat ... vs The President, Vinayak Karmachari ... on 25 November, 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3051/2022 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/11/2024 undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3051 of 2022 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER ========================================================== Approved for Reporting Yes No ✔ ========================================================== DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER SHRI GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT C
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All Gujarat HC judgments →
⚖ LegalFirms.in Directory
Find a verified advocate for this matter
Dealing with a similar case? Connect with a verified advocate on LegalFirms.in.
Find an Advocate →