Municipal Commissioner/Director, Ahmedabad Janmarg Ltd. v. Karnavati Nagarparivahan Mazdoor Sangh & Ors.
The Gujarat High Court declined to interfere with an order restoring an industrial reference concerning workers’ demands for regularisation and service benefits in the Ahmedabad Janmarg Ltd. BRTS project. The Court observed that the reference had been dismissed for non-prosecution without a decision on merits, and that restoration upon sufficient cause being shown falls within the court’s discretion. It directed completion of the reference proceedings within six months from receipt of the order.
The workers’ union had raised demands concerning permanent employment, pay benefits and seniority for workers engaged in the Ahmedabad Janmarg Ltd. project. The industrial reference was dismissed for non-prosecution and subsequently restored by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad, through its order dated 21 August 2017. Ahmedabad Janmarg Ltd. challenged the restoration, disputing the union’s explanation for its absence and asserting that the workers had been appointed by contractors or their agencies. The High Court observed that the dispute had not been adjudicated on merits. It held that restoration is a matter of judicial discretion once sufficient cause is established, describing sufficient cause as a reasonable explanation satisfying the court that the litigant should receive an opportunity to lead evidence. The Court found no reason to interfere with the restoration order. It directed completion of the reference within six months from receipt of its order, with adjudication strictly on merits and cooperation from both parties without unnecessary adjournments. The judgment preserves the opportunity to pursue the workers’ claims. It does not grant regularisation, award wage benefits or finally determine the employer–employee relationship