Page 1

1

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

Page 2

2

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

Page 3

3

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]

Page 4

4

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]