Gujarat Court December 1997 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Baroda Municipal Servant Union Vs. Baroda Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1997
Reported in: [1998(79)FLR930]; (1998)1GLR767
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. By this Special Civil Application, the petitioner-Baroda Municipal Servant Union challenges the order of the Commissioner of Vadodara Municipal Corporation, at Annexure-E dated 3rd March, 1993, by which certain benefits which had been given to the employees working in the octroi section of the Corporation under the Award of the Industrial Tribunal have been reduced. 2. Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that, the petitioner-union had raised an industrial dispute on 22nd February, 1979 demanding heavy duty allowance at the rate of 15% to the employees who are rendering their services in the Octroi Department of the Corporation. This demand, as usual, was not acceded to by the Corporation and, consequent upon that, the State Government referred the matter for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, at Ahmedabad, where the same came to be registered as Reference (IT) No. 599 of 1981. Later on, this Reference was transferred to the Industrial Tribunal at Vadoda...
Naranbhai G. Patel and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1254
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioners by this Special Civil Application are raising a question - whether the fixation of a lower grade for persons belonging to the cadre of Social Workers and other cadres but not holding Post-Graduate degree is violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India when a higher grade is fixed for persons belonging to the same cadre or cadres but holding Post-Graduate degree. 2. In para 30 of this Special Civil Application, the petitioners stated that when the Gujarat State Extension Educators' Mahamandal, which is a Union of the Extension Educators, came to know about the fact of prescribing of two pay scales for the same post on the basis of the qualifications, it filed a petition in this Court being Special Civil Application No. 3388 of 1981 in August, 1981 or thereabout and this Court was pleased to issue a Rule in the said petition and was also pleased to pass an interim order restraining the respondents of the said petition from calling upon the ...
Babubhai Gadarmal Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1341
S.K. Keshote, J.1. In this case, the Counsel for the petitioners has submitted written arguments. The Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has also submitted written arguments to which the Counsel for the petitioners submitted arguments in rejoinder and further arguments in rejoinder. However, the Counsel for the petitioners is not present to make the oral submissions.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the owners of the property in dispute were Ranchhodlal Vithaldas and others. The property in dispute has been granted on lease to the petitioners by two separate registered deeds. The first deed is dated 16th December, 1950 in respect of the land admeasuring 1,386 sq. yds. of land of Final Plot No. 67/1 in favour of the petitioner No. 3 for a period of 14 years at an annual rent of Rs. 1,150/-. On the same date, another lease deed was executed of the land admeasuring 2,099 sq. yds. of the Final Plot No. 67/2 for a period of 14 years in the name of the father of petitioner Nos. 1 an...
Premjibhai L. Gamit Vs. Executive Engineer, (Panchayat) R and B Divisi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-02-1997
Reported in: (1998)3GLR2550
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petition is filed for declaring the action of the respondents in giving artificial intermittent break on every 30th day during the entire service period of the petitioner to be illegal invalid and inoperative. The petitioner further prays that the respondents be directed to pay to the petitioner the wages for the break period. The last and the important prayer is made for the declaration of the action of the respondents of terminating the services of the petitioner as being violative of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The writ petition has been amended by the petitioner and as per the amended petition, the services of the petitioner were terminated on 19th October 1995.2. This Court, on 9-12-1985 passed the order which reads as under:Rule. Interim relief refused. However, it will be open to the respondents to give employment to the petitioner anywhere in the District as and when the work is available for 29 days on the same terms and conditions ...
Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Samantsinh H. Chavda and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR750
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner, Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, by this Special Civil Application, challenges the validity, legality and correctness of the order of respondent No. 2 passed on the application of the petitioner filed under Section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and registered as Case No. 39 of 1987.2. The respondent No. 1 -workman is the employee of the petitioner-Corporation and without permission of the Corporation he contested the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Tarkhanda. He was elected as Sarpanch and has worked as Sarpanch under the false name of Gulabsinh Himatsinh Chavda. A regular departmental enquiry was held against respondent No. 1 on the misconduct of contesting election of Sarpanch without permission and the misconduct alleged against him was proved and the Corporation had resolved to dismiss him from the services of the Corporation. As a permission has to be taken under Section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act for the s...
Chaturbhai Dahyabhai Vaghela and anr. Vs. Surabhai Somabhai Vaghela an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1228
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The challenge has been made by the petitioner by this Special Civil Application to the order of the Revenue Tribunal dated 3-11-1988 passed in Revision Application No. TEN. B.A. 722 of 1983. In Tenancy Case No. Chaklasi/32G/1 of 1980, Mamlatdar & A.L.T., Nadiad vide its order dated 23-4-1982 decided that the respondents herein were tenants of the land bearing Survey No. 1784/ 1. But as the predecessor of Mamlatdar & A.L.T., had decided the matter under Section 32G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') holding that as these respondents were cultivating the land under the conditional sale and the matter was closed, till that order is set aside, it operates as res judicata. Though, on merits the matter was decided in favour of the respondents but on the ground aforesaid relief was not granted. Against this order of the Mamlatdar & A.L.T., Nadiad the respondents preferred an appeal before the Dy. Collector, Nadiad b...
Rambhaben D/O. Pannabhai Vs. Civil Judge (S.D.) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1061
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties.2. The petitioner, an employee working in the District Court, Surendranagar, has filed this Special Civil Application praying for direction to the respondents to treat her as full-time employee on the establishment of the District Court, Surendranager and to appoint her daughter as full-time employee on the establishment of the District Court, Surendanagar. A prayer has also been made for quashing and setting aside the letter dated 12-3-1990, Annexure F. The petitioner has lastly prayed for direction to the respondents to pay her difference of wages of fulltime employee and part-time employee since April 2, 1975 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.3. By letter dated 12-3-1990, Annexure F, office of the respondent No. 2 asked the petitioner to discharge her duties properly and if she fails to do so, her services are likely to be terminated. But the fact remains that her services are not terminated. Not only this, but T...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›