RAKHIAL GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. JAGATSINH ADESINH JHALA

Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 4220 of 2006, Judgment Date: Jul 23, 2015

                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4220 OF 2006


Rakhial Gram Panchayat                                           ..Appellant

                            versus

Jagatsinh Adesinh Jhala                                         ..Respondent


                            O R D E R

J.S.Khehar, J.

            The respondent was appointed as an  Octroi  Clerk  by  the  Gram
Panchayat, Rakhial, i.e., the appellant before this Court, on 31.3.1977,  on
temporary basis, inter alia, for a lump sum salary of  Rs.200/-  per  month.
In addition to the above, he was not entitled  even  to  dearness  allowance
or any other allowance(s).  In  terms  of  the  order  of  appointment,  the
respondent actually assumed his duties with effect from 1.4.1977.
            The pleadings of the case reveal, that for a short  period,  the
work of collecting octroi, which had originally  been  vested  in  the  Gram
Panchayat, came to be executed through a  contractor.   The  respondent  was
accordingly required to serve under a contractor,  in  continuation  of  his
order of appointment dated 31.3.1977.  The  respondent  originally  declined
to do so.  But subsequently, assumed his duties on 10.6.1986 under the  Gram
Panchayat.  Thereafter, the service of the  respondent  was  dispensed  with
with effect from 30.6.1986.
            Even though, the  challenge  raised  by  the  respondent  has  a
chequered history, it is relevant to mention, that the respondent  succeeded
in Letters Patent Appeal No. 933 of 1995, when a Division Bench of the  High
Court on  29.7.2004  accepted,  that  the  resolution  passed  by  the  Gram
Panchayat  dated  30.6.1986,  for  dispensing  with  the  service   of   the
respondent, was not in consonance with law.  The High Court accordingly  set
aside the above resolution.  The respondent was, therefore,  ordered  to  be
reinstated, against the post of an Octroi Clerk. By the order passed by  the
High Court, the respondent was deemed to be treated as  having  continuously
rendered service against the post of Octroi  Clerk,  with  effect  from  the
date his services were dispensed with.  He was also held  entitled  to  full
back wages,  besides  other  consequential  benefits,  for  the  intervening
period. The review petition filed by the appellant came to be  dismissed  by
the High Court, vide an order dated 14.09.2004.
            The operation of the above order passed by the High  Court,  was
stayed by  this  Court  on  24.10.2005.  The  aforesaid  interim  order  has
continued till date.
            It does not appeal to logic, that a temporary  employee  can  be
allowed to continue in service, when  the  very  purpose  for  which  he  is
engaged does not survive.  The pleadings  in  this  case  reveal,  that  the
obligation cast on Gram Panchayats to collect  octroi  ceased  in  the  year
2001.  As such, even if one was not to interfere with the  conclusion  drawn
by the High Court, in setting  aside  the  resolution  passed  by  the  Gram
Panchayat dated 30.06.1986, it is apparent, that the  respondent  could  not
have continued beyond the year 2001,  and/or  be  paid  emoluments  for  the
period after 2001.
            In the above view of the matter, we are of  the  view,  that  if
the calculation of the actual amount payable to  the  respondent  is  to  be
done at the rate of wages paid to him, when he was engaged in  service,  the
arrears of the respondent for the period from 1986 to 2001 could  only  have
been determined at the rate of Rs.200/- per month. BY the above  yardsticks,
the respondent would be entitled to, only a sum of Rs.2,500/- per annum.  If
the amount had even been doubled  by the time his  services  were  dispensed
with,  he  would  be  earning  approximately  Rs.5,000/-   per   annum,   on
30.06.1986.
            Keeping in all that mind, we are of the view, that the  ends  of
justice would be met, if a  quantified  lump  sum  amount  is  paid  to  the
respondent as back wages.  We are satisfied in quantifying the above  amount
at Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh  only).       The  above  amount  shall  be
released to the respondent within three months, from the  date  a  certified
copy of this order, is furnished to the Gram Panchayat.
            The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.


                                                   …......................J.
                                                      [JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR]


NEW DELHI;                                         …......................J.
JULY 23, 2015.                                           [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]





ITEM NO.107               COURT NO.4               SECTION IX

               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal  No(s).  4220/2006

RAKHIAL GRAM PANCHAYAT                             Appellant(s)

                                VERSUS

JAGATSINH ADESINH JHALA                            Respondent(s)


Date : 23/07/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL


For Appellant(s) Mr. Preetesh Kapur, Adv.
                       Ms. Daisy Hannah, Adv.
                    for     Mr. Sanjay Kapur,AOR

For Respondent(s)      Ms. Nidhi,Adv.

          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R

            The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.


(Renuka Sadana)                        (Parveen Kr. Chawla)
 Court Master                                     AR-cum-PS
            [signed order is placed on the file]