SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Guj) 174

H.K.RATHOD
TALUKA DEVELOPMENT OFFICER – Appellant
Versus
DHURABHAI VIRABHAI VANKAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.M.MANGUKIYA, J.D.AJMERA, M.R.SHAH, Mukesh R.Shah

H. K. RATHOD, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned advocate Mr. M. R. Shah for the petitioners in this group of petitions and Mr. J. D. Ajmera as well as Mr. B. M. Mangukia for the respondents workmen in these group of petitions.

( 2 ) THE respondents herein were working with the petitioner and their services were terminated in the year 1998 on 26/07/1988 and, therefore, they raised industrial dispute before the labour court Godhra by filing separate reference. Before the labour court, the petitioner was not remaining present in these references and, therefore, the labour court made an exparte award dated 8/07/1993 and has, thereby, granted reinstatement with continuity of service with full back wages with interim period. Thereafter, for setting aside such an ex parte award, the petitioners moved applications before the labour court under Rule 26-A of the Industrial Disputes Act (Gujarat) Rules 1966. Said applications preferred by the petitioner before the labour court were objected by the respondent workmen. Thereafter, said applications under rule 26-A of the said rules were dismissed by the labour court for default in absence of the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner filed applications










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top