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

2004 Supreme(Guj) 675

AKIL KURESHI
KANJIBHAI PUNJABHAI PAMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: K.R.KOSHTI, M.S.Rao, R.C.KAKKAD, SANGITA N.PAHVA, VINITA S.VINAYAK

AKIL KURESHI, J.

( 1 ) IN these proceedings, the workmen are claiming benefits under section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act. Since common questions of law and facts arise they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) BEFORE going further, brief facts involved in these cases can be noted.

( 3 ) IN Civil Application No. 1346 of 2004 in Special Civil Application No. 384 of 2001, the applicant-workman had filed reference (LCS) No. 157/92 before the Labour Court, Surendranagar. The Labour Court by its award dated 4. 4. 2000 was pleased to order reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service, however, with 25 per cent backwages. The employer, i. e. State Government, challenged the award of the Labour Court by filing the present petition being Special Civil Application No. 384 of 2001 on 15. 1. 2001. Initially, this Court issued notice dated 17. 1. 2001 upon the respondent-workman, i. e. present applicant. Thereafter by the order dated 16. 4. 2001, the petition came to be admitted. On 16. 4. 2001 itself the impugned award was stayed. The workman i. e. the applicant herein, thereafter, filed the present Civil Application No. 1346 of 200




























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