Back
Manager, Uttar Gujarat Vij Company Limited, Sub Division, Idar – Appellant
Versus
Desai Gemarbhai Jesingbhai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Harshad Patel, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no. 1 waives service of notice of Rule.
2. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner employer has challenged the judgement and award dated 05.11.2019 passed by the Labour Court, Himmatnagar in Reference (LCH) No. 41 of 2014 by which the Labour Court directed that the respondent workman be treated to have been in service till his date of retirement of 30.04.2014 and be paid 40% backwages.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the declaration of age by a workman at the time of joining, in the absence of documentary proof, can be considered the sole basis for reckonin....
Service records' date of birth final per Standing Orders; late correction not permitted, upholding superannuation.
The court emphasized the illegality of appointing a child in a labor-oriented industry and the importance of genuine documents to support claims related to date of birth in employment disputes.
The premature retirement order based on an alleged age dispute at the fag end of the petitioner's service was a clear violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
