Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J
Ramdayal – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Engineer – Respondent
Order :
1. This instant petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 20.11.2017 passed by the Labour Court, Bharatpur in Civil Misc. Case No.77/2014 (42/2003) by which the application filed by the petitioner for recalling the award dated 14.01.2002 qua the petitioner has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with similarly situated persons raised an industrial dispute and in the said matter one representative i.e. Ramavtar Jain was authorized to appear on their behalf and litigate the matter before the Labour Court. Counsel submits that the petitioner remained under the belief that whenever the presence of the petitioner would be required, he would be called upon to adduce his evidence by the said representation. Counsel submits that the said representative namely Ramavtar Jain did not appear on the fateful day, thus, the opportunity of the petitioner was closed and in absence of the evidence of the petitioner, his statement of claim has been rejected vide order dated 14.01.2002. Counsel submits that a similar claim petition submitted by other workmen has been allowed and a direction has been issued fo
A party must be afforded a fair opportunity to present their case, even in the face of previous negligence, to uphold the principles of justice.
Parties must be afforded reasonable opportunities to present evidence in labor disputes to ensure procedural fairness, particularly in the context of extraordinary circumstances such as a pandemic.
The genuine reasons for non-appearance, prompt filing of applications, and the poor financial and medical condition of the Workman were considered as grounds for restoration of the claim petition bef....
Litigants should not suffer for inadvertent errors made by their advocates, especially in cases where genuine circumstances are presented, ensuring fair opportunity to present their claims.
A court may set aside an ex-parte labour award and restore the proceedings to allow for an adjudication on merits when the initial default is attributed to counsel-related oversight, provided there i....
The discretion to reopen evidence under Rule 17 of the Industrial Disputes (Gujarat) Rules, 1966 must be exercised judiciously, balancing the rights of both parties and avoiding prejudice.
Financial hardship can justify delays in legal proceedings, and parties must be allowed to present evidence in support of their claims.
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
