Successor University cannot challenge a regularization award after two years if its predecessor accepted the verdict.

The respondent was employed as a watchman/Class-IV employee by the petitioner-University starting 16.07.1993

The Industrial Tribunal, Jamnagar, in Ref. No. IT/33/2018, passed an award on 05.04.2023, directing the petitioner to regularize the respondent as a watchman (or an equivalent Class-IV post if unavailable) with all consequential benefits, including seniority and pension

The petitioner challenged this award in 2025, approximately two years after its pronouncement.

During the pendency of the original reference, the Kamdhenu University Act, 2020 came into force, which the petitioner claimed shifted jurisdiction from the Industrial Tribunal to the Civil Services Tribunal

1. Whether the petitioner-University, as a successor-in-interest, can challenge an industrial award two years after its pronouncement when its predecessor (Junagadh University) had accepted it?

2. Whether the Industrial Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to decide the Reference in light of Section 68 of the Kamdhenu University Act, 2020?

The court applied the principle of successor-in-interest liability and the doctrine of finality of awards.

It specifically relied on Section 68(1) of the Kamdhenu University Act, 2020, regarding the absorption of staff and the continuity of service conditions

Furthermore, the court adhered to the precedent set by a Division Bench in Letters Patent Appeal No. 408 of 2026, which established that a successor university cannot challenge a regularization award years after it was passed if the predecessor university had effectively accepted it by not filing a timely challenge

While the petitioner argued that the 2020 Act barred the Industrial Tribunal's jurisdiction and subjected employees to the Gujarat Civil Services Rules [p. 3], the court noted that the petitioner only filed the challenge nearly two years later in 2025

Following the reasoning in a similar case (LPA No. 408 of 2026), the court observed that since Junagadh University (the original employer) had contested the proceedings and suffered the award without immediate challenge, Kamdhenu University—as the successor—is bound by that award

The court emphasized that the petitioner cannot seek to re-open factual aspects or jurisdictional issues two years after taking over the responsibility of employees who had served for decades

The court affirmed that because the award was accepted by the predecessor entity, the petitioner is legally bound to regularize the respondent as per the Tribunal's directions