Gujarat Court January 1984 Judgments
Sarabhai Chemicals Vs. Subhas N. Pandya
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1984
Reported in: [1984(49)FLR244]; (1984)1GLR329; (1984)IILLJ75Guj
P.S. Poti, C.J. 1. The challenge in this application is to the award passed by the Labour Court of Baroda holding that the opponent company, who is the applicant before us, was acting illegally in retrenching the worker who is the respondent here. The Labour Court set aside the order and directed reinstatement of the worker in his original post with full back wages within 30 days of the publication of the award. The ground of challenge is that the worker concerned was only a badli worker that therefore, there was no relationship of employer and employee and retrenchment of such a worker will not attract the provisions of S. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The further contention is that even assuming that the retrenchment was illegal, the direction to reinstate the workman with back wages was not called for. 2. By a very well considered judgment, the Labour Court has rightly found that there was retrenchment and that was in contravention of S. 25F. That being so, it found the ...
Tag this Judgment!D.S. Vasavada Vs. Chief Inspector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)IILLJ124Guj
Mankad, J. 1. These two petitions involve a common question namely, whether an employee or a workman employed in a cinema theatre is entitled to Dearness Allowance (hereinafter referred to as 'D.A.' for short) for the four weekly holidays in a month, which are paid holidays under S. 31(3) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. Special Civil Application No. 3390 of 1981 is filed on behalf of the members of the Gujarat Rajya Cinema Employees Union. It is stated that the employees employed by 25 cinema houses in Ahmedabad are members of the said Union. The contention of the petitioner Union is that the employees of the five cinema theatres in Ahmedabad, whose managers are joined as respondents Nos. 2 to 6 (hereinafter referred to as 'Managements of Cinema Theatres' or 'Cinema Theatres'), were paid D.A. at the rate of 75 per cent of D.A. payable to the textile workers at Ahmedabad before 1st January, 1974, under the settlements arrived a...
Tag this Judgment!Kheda District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Bhargav Balwantrai V ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)2GLR789; (1984)IILLJ330Guj
R.A. Mehta, J. 1. The petitioner-employer, a Co-operative Bank has preferred this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution against the concurrent orders of the Labour Court and the Appellate Industrial Court directing reinstatement of the respondent workman with full back wages. 2. The respondent workman had made an application dated 1st March, 1980 for employment in the petitioner-Bank. In pursuance of that application and the subsequent interview, the respondent was appointed as a temporary clerk in this Co-operative Bank on a Monthly Salary of Rs. 186/- plus D.A. The respondent was also required a furnish a cash or personal surety of Rs. 5,000/- and also to execute a form of declaration of fidelity and security. The respondent joined the services of the petitioner Bank on 5th May, 1980 and he was relieved from his services on 31st January, 1981 by an order dated 30th January, 1981. 3. The workman raised an industrial dispute by an application under S. 79 of the Bombay Industrial ...
Tag this Judgment!Sarabhai Chemicals Staff Association Vs. Sarabhai Chemicals and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1984
Reported in: (1984)1GLR566
R.A. Mehta, J.1. These two petitions are filed by workmen of the companies of Sarabhai group against the common judgment and award of the Industrial Tribunal dated 5th August 1980 and published on 21st August 1980 in the Gujarat Government Gazette Part I-L at pages 4540 to 4575. Special Civil Application No. 277 of 1981 is filed by Sarabhai Chemicals Staff Association against Sarabhai Chemicals and Special Civil Application No. 700 of 1981 is filed by Chemical Mazdooor Sabha against (1) Sarabhai Chamicals; (2) Sarabhai Common Services; (3) Sarabhai M. Chemicals; (4) Sarabhai Research Centre; and (5) Suhrid Geigy Ltd. The earlier award in Reference (IT) No. 45 of 1971 was passed in March 1974. The same was terminated on 21st February 1976 and the present demands were raised by the Staff Association on 5th September 1976 and by the Chemical Mazdoor Sabha on 27th May 1977. The demands came to be referred to the Industrial Tribunal by different notifications of Reference between 25th Janua...
Tag this Judgment!Nareshkumar Kikabhai Tandel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-1984
Reported in: 1986CriLJ457
S.L. Talati, J.1. The appellant is Junior Engineer working in Sub-Divisional Office (Telephones) in Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. The learned Special Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(l)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and also for the offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer further R.I. for one month on each count. The substantive sentences are ordered to run concurrently. The appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence by filing this appeal.2. The prosecution case shortly stated is as under:There is Federal Bank Ltd. which is a scheduled bank and it had a branch in National Chambers on Ashram Road at Ahmedabad. They wanted to shift their premises and go on the opposite side on the same road. The premises to which they were going to shift are situated near Ashok Karnavati Hotel. This was t...
Tag this Judgment!Vasudev Chunilal Pancholi Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-1984
Reported in: (1984)2GLR844
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. In these cases challenge is made by the petitioners to land acquisition proceedings in regard to acquisition of land for expansion of industrial estate by the Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation at Surendranagar. Two notifications for this purpose were published in the Gujarat Government Gazette one dated November 8, 1979 and another dated April 10, 1980. Pursuant to the notification dated November 8, 1979 notifications under Section 6 were issued, one without the urgency clause on 22nd of October 1982 and another applying the urgency clause on November 4,1982. Pursuant to the second notification dated April 10, 1980 under Section 4 of the Act similarly two notifications under Section 6 were published, one with the urgency clause on 5th March, 1983 and another without the urgency clause earlier on 27th of January, 1983. The petitioners in these cases have come to this Court very much later, the earliest being on 29th December, 1983. They challenge the acquisiti...
Tag this Judgment!D.J. Vaghela and ors. Vs. Kantibhai Jethabhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ974
ORDERA.P. Ravani, J.1. In case of conflict between the notes of injury on the person of accused made by the Magistrate and the deposition given by the Medical Officer who examined the accused, should it be necessary for the learned Magistrate to transfer the case? Can it be a valid and sufficient ground for transfer of a case? The application is filed with a view to seek an answer to this question. But other questions concerning the protection of basic human rights of citizens also arise in this case. They are -Is there any warrant for assumption that complaints of ill-treatment in police custody is 'mostly' made by habitual offenders? Even if it be so, will a Magistrate be justified in adopting a callous and superficial approach when complaint of custodial violence is made before him? Has the police got any express or implied licence to inflict torture on persons in custody? Is it not that mostly the people belonging to the poor and middle class section of the society (both taken toge...
Tag this Judgment!Biharilal V. Vaishnav Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-20-1984
Reported in: (1984)2GLR1372
R.C. Mankad, J.1. Unreasonable and incomprehensible stand taken up by the State Government has driven the petitioner, a retired Small Cause Judge, who was re-employed as Registrar's Nominee on the Board of Nominees, Ahmedabad Division to file this petition to claim benefit under resolution Annexure 'F' dated December 4, 1979.2. Petitioner retired as Judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, on February 29, 1976. He was appointed as Registrar's Nominee on the Board of Nominees, Ahmedabad Division with effect from the date he took charge by order Annexure 'C dated August 9, 1979. Petitioner took charge as Registrar's Nominee on August 16, 1979. It is not in dispute that at the time when petitioner was appointed as Registrar's Nominee on the Board of Nominees, he was entitled to draw honorarium in addition to his pension under Government resolution Annexure 'A' dated May 25, 1971. Opening part of the said resolution reads as under:With a view to bringing about uniformity in the amount o...
Tag this Judgment!Pravinkumar Shantilal Shah Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-19-1984
Reported in: (1984)1GLR519
R.A. Mehta, J.1. This petition raises the question of handing over possession of the muddamal truck during the pendency of the trial. The trial court has directed that the possession of the truck be handed over to the respondent No. 2, accused because he is the registered owner thereof.2. The second respondent, registered owner, had entered into a contract with the petitioner dated 12th May 1982 whereunder the consideration was fixed at Rs. 95,000/- and the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 25,000/-towards part-payment of the agreed amount and the balance amount of Rs. 70,000/- was to be paid by monthly instalment of Rs. 7,000/- beginning from 1st June 1982 and the monthly instalment was to be paid before 15th of every month. In case the purchaser (the petitioner) failed to pay the instalments, the vendor had reserved his right to take appropriate legal proceedings and the possession of the truck was handed over to the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner was in lawful possession of the sai...
Tag this Judgment!Jayantilal Maneklal Soni and ors. and Amritlal Chandmal JaIn and anr. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-1984
Reported in: 1984(3)ECC64; 1984(16)ELT33(Guj)
ORDERP.S. Poti, C.J. 1. Notice in SCA No. 122/84. Shri H.M. Mehta waives service of notice for the respondents and agrees to have the matter heard today. 2. The petitioners in these cases, four in the first and two in the second have filed these petitions seeking stay of the departmental proceedings under the Customs Act taken up against them pending the disposal of Criminal case No. 639/83 before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad. The 3rd respondent, the Assistant Collector (Preventive) Customs Headquarters filed a criminal complaint in the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's court at Ahmedabad against 22 persons including the petitioners in the two cases. Summons have been issued on taking cognizance of this. While the criminal proceeding is thus pending proceedings have been taken up by issue of show cause notice to the petitioners and certain others as to why action should not be taken under the Customs Act in regard to violation of the provisions of the Act by them. The ple...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »