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

2011 Supreme(Guj) 684

RAVI R.TRIPATHI
W. H. Brady & Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
A. R. Sulochana – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:D.G. Shukla, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Satyapal K. Gusain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

Ravi R. Tripathi, J.

1. Special Civil Application No.16624 of 2010 is filed by 'W H Brady & Company Limited' being aggrieved by award and order dated 14/09/2010, a copy of which is produced at 'Annexure - A' to this petition whereby the learned Judge of the Labour Court No.5, Ahmedabad was pleased to pass an order in Reference (LCA) No.388 of 2002 of payment of 20% back wages with incidental benefits, within 30 days from the date of publication of the award.

Special Civil Application No. 14926 of 2010 is filed by 'Sulochana A R' challenging the same award and order dated 14/09/2010 passed by the learned Judge of the Labour Court No.5, Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA) No.388 of 2002.

The parties being common, they are referred to as 'establishment' and 'the workman'. The case of the establishment is that workman is not entitled to any back wages; whereas the case of the workman is that she is entitled for 100% back wages and, grant of only 20% back wages is nothing, but a mockery of justice.

Learned Advocate, Mr.S K Gusain, appearing for the workman submitted that the workman was before the Court for enforcing her rights and the learned Judge of the Labour Court was expected to ad

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