Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M.K.THAKKER
Total Solutions – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra Rameshchandra Vyas – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.K. THAKKER, J.
1. Since the issue raised in the all these petitions are similar, they are being decided by a common judgment. Facts of Special Civil Application No.7819 of 2025 is taken for consideration of the disposal of these petitions.
2. The present petition is filed under Article 226 read with Article 14 and 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India thereby, challenging the order passed by the learned labour court, Ahmedabad dated 01.10.2024 in Reference T (L.C.A.) No.452 of 2011.
3. It is the case of the present petitioner that the petitioner establishment is engaged in the business of providing investigation solutions for MACP and other Miscellaneous claims of General Insurance Companies. While discharging obligation towards aforesaid Insurance Companies, the petitioner establishment used to and continues to engage service of freelance individuals from available talent tool, on need and case to case basis and the payment is also made on case to case basis. The respondent who is also one of such individual who used to be engaged by the petitioner establishment on task basis, approached the learned labour court through Union claiming the breach of section 25(F), 25(G) a
The court affirmed that a party cannot disown its advocate's negligence, holding that the actions of an appointed advocate bind the client, reinforcing accountability in legal proceedings.
A litigant cannot escape responsibility for proceedings failures by blaming their advocate; vigilance regarding one's rights is essential.
The court reconsidered the determination of employee status under the Industrial Disputes Act, emphasizing the need for a proper inquiry into workman classification due to termination disputes.
The court affirmed that termination without a departmental inquiry is illegal, and reinstatement is justified when the employer fails to present evidence despite multiple opportunities.
The court upheld the Labour Court's order for reinstatement and back wages, emphasizing the equal application of the law of limitation and the petitioner's failure to present its case.
Delay in filing a reference does not preclude adjudication on merits, especially when the dispute remains alive.
Labour Court has held against the workman on the basis that the documents like pay sleep, muster roll etc. are not produced. But, at this juncture, it is require to peruse the oral evidence of the wo....
The burden of proof lies with the workman to demonstrate completion of 240 days of service prior to termination, and failure to fulfill this requirement results in dismissal of claims.
The court emphasized that mere assertions of rights do not justify delay in legal proceedings unless supported by substantial reasons, enforcing adherence to limitation principles.
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
