Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M. K. THAKKER
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Rameshbhai Govindbhai Dhapa – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging labour court's award on regularization (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments against regularization (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. evidence of service duration and regularization (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. final directions for compliance (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
M. K. THAKKER, J.
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocates Mr.Jwalit Soneji and Mr.Krutarth Pandya waives notice of Rule on behalf of the respondents.
2. The present petition is preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the award dated 24.05.2024 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bhavnagar, in Reference (Demand) Case No. 1 of 2004. By the said award, the learned Labour Court directed the present petitioner to consider the services of the respondent for the purpose of regularization with effect from 02.12.2014, the date of the Government Resolution issued by the Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare. Further, the petitioner was directed to pay the differential amount of pay from the date of the award within 30 days from the date of its publication. The Court also directed that the respondent be extended the benefits of regularization from 02.12.2014, and th
Regularization of long-serving daily wager employees is justified even under contractual terms, ensuring fair treatment and benefits based on continuous service.
The court recognized that long-standing employees performing essential duties are entitled to regularization despite initial temporary designations, emphasizing fairness in employment due to sustaine....
Long-term service in essential roles warrants regularization despite procedural irregularities; employment rights must be upheld in fairness.
The court held that long-term employees engaged in essential tasks are entitled to regularization despite initial irregular appointments, emphasizing fair employment practices.
Continuous service by employees performing essential duties can warrant regularization despite procedural irregularities in their initial appointments.
Long-term service in essential duties warrants regularization despite initial temporary classification; termination without just cause violates employment rights.
Continuous long service in essential roles grants employees the right to regularization despite initial contractual labels, promoting equity in employment practices.
Employees with long-term service in essential roles may be regularized despite lacking formal educational qualifications, emphasizing contributions over compliance with procedural norms.
Long-term employees performing essential and continuous functions may claim regularization after a decade of service, despite previous procedural irregularities.
Long-standing service without a formal appointment does not deny employees the right to regularization; discriminatory treatment of similarly situated employees violates principles of equity and fair....
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
