Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Prashantkumar Arvindbhai Barot – Appellant
Versus
Principal Chief Conservator Of Forests And Head Of Forest Force, Gandhinagar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's requests for reinstatement and relief. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background of petitioner's service and termination. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's analysis of the legal provisions and prior judgments. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. court directs reinstatement with benefits. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
Nikhil S. Kariel, J.
1. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Niyati Chauhan on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Aditya Pathak on behalf of respondent- State.
2. By way of the present petition the petitioner has prayed for the following prayers:
A. That the Hon'ble may be pleased to admit and allow this petition;
B. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to quash and set aside the orders dated 16.09.2020 passed by respondent no. 2 and order dated 19.09.2020 passed by respondent no. 3 whereby, the petitioner was terminated from his services and count the services of the petitioner continuous in nature;
C. Pending admission hearing and final disposal of captioned matter the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the implementation and execution of the orders dated 16.09.2020 passed by respondent no. 2 and order dated 19.09.2020 passed by respondent no. 3 whereby, the petitioner was terminate
The court reaffirmed that amendments to employment regulations should apply prospectively, preventing unjust termination based on retrospective rule applications, especially under pandemic circumstan....
Termination conditions post-regularization cannot be applied retrospectively, ensuring employees maintain their original seniority status.
Notification which has amended Rule 9A by inserting words “or within a period of two years thereafter” after the words “contractual basis” under Sub-rule(3) of Rule 9A of Rules, 1967 and Government R....
The court established that once employees are regularized, they cannot be treated as fresh appointees based on subsequent examination results, especially when prior qualifications were valid.
Point of Law - There is no violation of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. As there is alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner to approach the Lobour Court for ....
The court established that continuity of service recognized by a Labour Court must be considered for granting benefits under government resolutions for daily wage workers.
Reinstatement of employees following illegal termination entails continuity of service, allowing for benefits under applicable government resolutions from the initial date of joining.
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
