Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M. K. THAKKER
Rajkot Municipal Corporation Through Municipal Commissioner – Appellant
Versus
Jitubhai Laxmanbhai Vaghela – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging reinstatement due to misconduct. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's reasoning on absenteeism and implications. (Para 4 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments regarding termination and procedure. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. ruling on the necessity of inquiry in termination cases. (Para 9) |
| 5. conclusion and order of the court. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
M. K. Thakker, J.
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.Deepak Aloria waives service of notice of Rule, on behalf on respondent No.1.
2. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the award dated 09.07.2019 passed by the learned Labour Court, Rajkot in Reference (L.C.R.) No. 82 of 2014, whereby the petitioner has been directed to reinstate the respondent with continuity of service and to pay costs amounting to Rs.2,500/-.
3. It is the case of the present petitioner that the respondent was granted compassionate appointment following the death of his father, who was employed as a Safai Kamdar in the Solid Waste Management Department. Pursuant thereto, the respondent was appointed on 01.10.2005 to the post of Safai Sahayak for a period of five years on an ad hoc basis, with a fixed
A prolonged pattern of unauthorized absence can lead to an inference of voluntary abandonment of service without requiring a formal termination by the employer.
Unauthorized absence constitutes indiscipline justifying termination; previous misconduct and disciplinary records must be considered in disciplinary contexts.
Termination of a workman on a contractual basis may not constitute retrenchment if the employment is of a permanent nature, and unfair labor practices may warrant compensation instead of reinstatemen....
Absence due to illness does not equate to voluntary abandonment of service; a formal inquiry is required before termination based on absenteeism.
The termination of an employee without considering their representations and without proving misconduct is illegal.
The duty of the employer to re-engage the workman and the requirement of substantial evidence to prove abandonment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the employer must follow the relevant provisions of the I.D. Act before terminating the service of an employee, and failure to do so may entit....
Unauthorized absence must be proven as wilful misconduct by the Management; failure to do so invalidates termination.
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
