Back
M. K. THAKKER
DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY – Appellant
Versus
RAMSINH RAISINHBHAI PATEL – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.K. THAKKER, J.
1. Being aggrieved with the award passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara in Reference (IT) No. 101 of 2016 dated 08.09.2021 present petition is filed under Articles 14, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. Facts arising for the consideration is that the respondent was offered work as a part time employee in the month of February 1989 and was paid remuneration as fixed by the Government of Gujarat for the part time employee. The respondent herein was rendering his service for six hours per day and the work which was done by the respondent was purely temporary, ad-hoc and part time wages as per the administrative requirement. The grievance was raised before the learned tribunal by way of filing the Reference praying to grant the benefit of the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 for which the written statement was filed by the petitioner stating that the aforesaid Resolution pertaining to the Road and Building Department and as the petitioner was serving in the District Rural Development Agency, the same would not be applicable in the case of the present petitioner. Learned tribunal after assigning the reasons has allowed the Reference
The determination of employment status should be based on the actual nature of work performed, not solely on the appointment letter.
Piece-rate workers are entitled to benefits under the Government Resolution 17.10.1988 as they fall within the definition of wages under the Industrial Disputes Act.
A piece-rate worker is entitled to the same benefits as daily wagers under Government Resolution 17.10.1988, highlighting the necessity of equitable treatment in employment rights.
Point of Law- Principles of law highlighted, render the inaction on part of the respondent authorities (a) in not extending the benefits of 6th Pay Commission to the petitioners; (b) in not merging 5....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that denying employment benefits based on categorization as a part-timer is misconceived and constitutes unfair labor practice.
Employees completing a specific number of years are entitled to benefits of permanency and are to be treated at par with regularly appointed employees. Additionally, piece rated workers are entitled ....
Daily wage workers with over five years of service are entitled to benefits under the government resolution, irrespective of the 240 days work requirement.
The court ruled that the cut-off date of 29.10.2010 does not apply to Panchayat employees seeking benefits under the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988, directing reconsideration of their cases a....
Point of Law : Respondent workman cannot be said to be a person not entitled to such benefits and similarly situated persons are already enjoying the benefits of Government Resolution.
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
