N. V. ANJARIA, PRANAV TRIVEDI
Dave Girishbhai Vallabhbhai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N.V.ANJARIA, J.
Heard learned advocate Mr. B.J. Trivedi for the appellants workmen and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Shruti Dhruve for the respondent State, in both the appeals.
2. Both these Letters Patent Appeals preferred by the workmen arise from common judgment and order dated 10.04.2018 in respective Special Civil Applications passed by learned Single Judge. Since the impugned judgment is common and similar facts are involved and identical issues, both the appeals were heard together to be treated for final disposal by this judgment.
2.1 Before learned Single Judge, in Special Civil Application No.16565 of 2015, relatable to Letters Patent Appeal No. 1482 of 2018, what was under challenge was judgment and award dated 25.03.2015 passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference (LCB) No. 167 of 2005.
2.2 In the same way, it was the judgment and order of even date in Reference (LCB) No. 166 of 2005, which was challenged before learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 16750 of 2015, from which Letters Patent Appeal No. 1483 of 2018 has arisen.
2.3 In the respective judgment and awards, the Labour set aside the termination of the workman concerned and
Bhopal Vs. Santosh Kumar Seal [(2010) 6 SCC 773]
GDA v. Ashok Kumar [2008 (4) SCC 261]
Jagbir Singh Vs. Haryana State Agriculture Mktg. Board [(2009) 15 SCC 327]
Jaipur Development Authority v. Ramsahai [2006 (11) SCC 684]
M.P. Admn. v. Tribhuban [2007 (9) SCC 748]
Mahboob Deepak v. Nagar Panchayat
Rajasthan Development Corpn. v. Gitam Singh [(2013) 5 SCC 136]
Sita Ram v. Moti Lal Nehru Farmers Training Institute [2008 (5) SCC 75]
State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1
U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. v. Uday Narain Pandey [2006 (1) SCC 479]
Uttaranchal Forest Development Corpn. v. M.C. Joshi [2007 (9) SCC 353]
The relief of reinstatement and backwages is not automatic and should be independently assessed, especially for daily rated workmen. The court should consider various factors, including the status of....
Monetary compensation, not reinstatement, is appropriate for daily wage workers upon finding illegal terminations; reinstatement is not automatic even when procedural violations are confirmed.
Relief by way of reinstatement with backwages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a given fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescrib....
Illegal termination of short-term daily wager violating Section 25-F ID Act warrants lump-sum compensation, not reinstatement, considering brief service, long delay, superannuation, and no unfair pra....
The court upheld the illegal termination of the respondents/workmen and their entitlement to reinstatement with full back wages and other consequential benefits under the Industrial Disputes Act, 194....
In illegal termination cases involving daily-wage workers, reinstatement is not automatic; compensation and circumstances of employment should be evaluated.
The main legal point established is that in cases of illegal termination, the court may consider exceptional circumstances and order lump sum compensation instead of reinstatement, taking into accoun....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.