Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
M.K. THAKKER
Contracotr Kaushal Agency – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Labour Court – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against labour court's award (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding contractor's liability (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. evidence indicating contractors' relationships (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. justification of labour court's decision (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
M.K. THAKKER, J.
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned advocates for the respective respondents waive service of notice of Rule.
2. Since the issue raised in the these petitions are similar, they are being decided by a common judgment. The facts of Special Civil Application No. 7870 of 2025 are taken for the purpose of adjudication.
3. This petition is filed challenging the award dated 04.10.2024 passed by the learned Labour Court, Valsad, whereby the termination of the petitioner was held to be illegal and a lumpsum compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded in lieu of reinstatement and backwages.
4. As per the case of the petitioner before this Court, the dispute was raised by the workman under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the I.D. Act’) seeking reinstatement with backwages from the date of termination i.e. 22.03.2020, which came to be referred to the learned Labour Court, Valsad by
Contractors can be held liable for compensation even if no direct contract exists, based on their control over employment practices under the Industrial Disputes Act.
A workman must accept an offer of reinstatement to claim back wages; failure to do so constitutes abandonment of work, negating entitlement to relief.
Burden of proof in employment disputes shifts to the employer once workmen establish their employment. In cases of termination, statutory compliance is critical.
Labour law – Reinstatement - Granting of relief of reinstatement after such a long gap will not serve any purpose and, therefore, this Court is of the view that if the order to grant compensation
The court affirmed that termination under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act is applicable to part-time workers, allowing for reinstatement and back wages.
Reinstatement of workmen after illegal termination is not automatic; monetary compensation may be granted instead based on specific circumstances and legal precedents.
Illegal termination of short-term daily wager violating Section 25-F ID Act warrants lump-sum compensation, not reinstatement, considering brief service, long delay, superannuation, and no unfair pra....
Since litigious employer has gone back and forth from this Court before the Single Judge to the Division Bench and then Supreme Court and back on two occasions rendering the workman without the fruit....
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
