Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Ravindra V. Ghuge, J
Sarda Cloth Stores – Appellant
Versus
Pandharinath Bhanudas Mehetre – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment outlines reasons for appealing prior rulings. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. presents arguments regarding dismissal and reinstatement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. evaluates implications of previous court judgments. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. determines the appropriateness of reinstatement versus compensation. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. sets forth compensation directives and concludes the ruling. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner establishment is aggrieved by the judgment of the Industrial Court dated 08/01/2003, vide which, the respondent original complainant before the Labour Court, was granted reinstatement in service and his Revision (ULP) No. 66/1997 was allowed.
2. The prayers at clauses (C) and (D) in the petition, read as under :-
''(C) To quash and set aside the order dated 8.1.2003 passed by the Hon'ble Member of the Industrial court in revision ULP No. 66/1997.
(D) To quash and set aside the order dated 30.4.1997 passed by the Hon'ble Labour court at Ahmednagar in complaint ULP No. 3/1990.''
3. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner partnership firm is one of the largest cloth stores in this part of the State, he tried to contact his
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
