Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1995(3)WLC719; 1995(1)WLN580
Arun Madan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the matter of violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner under Article 14,16, 21 and 31(d) of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner has challenged the verbal order of retrenchment dated 1st March, 1989, whereby the services of the petitioner, who was appointed as a Beldar on daily wage basis, were terminated by the respondents without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or even issuing any show-cause notice to the petitioner.2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioner was appointed as Beldar on daily-wage basis @ Rs. 14/- per day, on 1-2-87 in the office of the respondents at Bharatpur and he was under the charge of Assistant Engineer.PWD Sub-Division, Nadbai, District Bharatpur. During the period 1.2.87 till March, 1989 the petitioner was made to work with artificial breaks in service. I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1992(1)WLN255
R. Balia, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as daily rated Junior Assistant on 1.12.1986 in Rajasthan Financial Corporation, Sirohl on which post he continued to function on 9.5.1988. By order dated 9.5.88 petitioners, services were terminated without any notice and without any compensation. The petitioner, challenges action of the respondent terminating petitioner's services on two fair grounds:2. Firstly, it is contended that Respondent Corporation being an industry within the meaning of this Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and petitioner being a workman under Section 2(s), he is entitled to benefit of provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. Since, he was in the services of the respondent continuously for the period of more than one year, his services could not have been terminated without complying with the pre-conditions of valid retrenchment under Chapter V-A of the Industrial Dispute Act. He has neither been given a notice of one month as required under Section 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1986(2)WLN561
Mahendra Bhushan Sharma, J.1. As common question of fact and law is involved in these three writ petitions it will be proper to deal with them together. The writ petitions are therefore being disposed of by a common order. The terms and conditions of the employees of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (for short, the Corporation) are governed by the Rajasthan Financial Corporation (Staff) Regulations, 1958 (for short, the Regulations) framed by the Board of Directors of the Corporation after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India and with the previous sanction of the Government of Rajasthan. The respondents published an advertisement in the Rajasthan Patrika dated July 10, 1978 for the posts of Junior Assistant/Typists and apprentices. Ail the three petitioners applied for the said posts. They appeared for interview/test on Sunday, 10th September, 1978 at 11 a.m. in the Head Office of the Corporation at Surya Niwas C/18 Bhagwandas Road, Jaipur. As a result of the type test and th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1994)ILLJ1155Raj; 1993(2)WLC751
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. It is indeed unfortunate that despite a clear verdict given by this Court as early as on October 7, 1991 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5368/90 Riyaz Ali v. State of Rajasthan and Ors., and 36 connected writ petitions, the petitioner has been compelled to file this writ petition seeking the same relief which had been given by this Court to similarly situated persons who had filed Writ Petitions No. 2281/91, 2293/91, 2294/91, 2403/91, 2404/91, 2619/92 and 2586/91 which were decided on October 7, 1991. It is strange that in cases of those persons who have approached the court the Director of Agriculture Department himself issued order on May 15, 1992 for reinstatement of those petitioners and yet he has failed to give effect to the order of the court in totality leading to the filing of this writ petition which could have been avoided if the departmental authorities had been a bit sympathetic and fair to the petitioner's case.2. Before I proceed further, I consider it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2006(1)Raj833
Ashok Parihar, J.1. A dispute in regard to regularisation of services of the respondent No. 3, the concerned workman was raised and the same was referred accordingly by the State Government to the Labour Court, Jaipur, After considering evidence and material on record, the Labour Court vide award dated 18.11.1988 observed that in absence of any regular post, the regular pay scale cannot be granted to the concerned workman, however, as and when any regular post is made available, the services of the concerned workman may be regularized and he may be given regular pay scale from the same date of regularisation.2. After passing of the award, it appears that the petitioner filed writ petition before this Court claiming regular pay scale on the post in question on the principle of equal pay for equal work. However, in view of the observations made by the Labour Court in the award, referred above, though this Court did not issue any directions, however, the writ petition was dismissed as wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1982)IILLJ17Raj; 1981()WLN678
S.C. Agarwal, J.1. This writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 14th Dec. 1971, passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Rajasthan, Jaipur thereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), whereby the Tribunal gave its approval to the action of the management of the ' Daily Rashtradoot ' ( hereinafter referred to as 'the management'') dismissing the petitioner from service.2. 'Rashtradoot', is a daily Hindi news- paper published from Jaipur. The petitioner, Dinesh Khare, joined 'Rashtradoot' in September, 1951, and he was appointed as Editor of the said newspaper in May, 1952. When he was employed as editor of the 'Rashtradoot' the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet dated 27th January, 1967 containing charges of misconduct and he was required to submit his explanation to the said charges. The petitioner submitted his expl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2001WLC(Raj)UC355; 2007(3)WLN224
Gyan Sudha Misra, J.1. A reference was initiated at the instance of respondent-workman-Amar Chand against his termination and for grant of back wages under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, While this matter was proceeding before the Labour Court cum Industrial Tribunal, an application was filed by the petitioner under, Sections 9 and 11 of the Rajasthan (Regulation of Appointment to Public Service and Rationalisation of Staff) Act, 1999 wherein Sections 9 and 11 lays down as follows:Section-9, Bar to regularisation of services--No person who is a daily wage employee and no person who is appointed on an urgent temporary basis and is continuing as such at the commencement of this Act shall have or shall be deemed ever to have a right to claim for regularisation of services on any ground whatsoever and the services of such person shall be liable to be terminated at any time with due notice:Provided that in the case of workmen falling within the scope of See. 25-F of the Industrial Dispu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1985WLN(UC)388
Ashok Kumar Mathur, J.1. In both these writ petitions identical questions of fact and law are involved, therefore they are disposed of by this common order.2. In both these writ petitions the award given by the Industrial Tribunal dated 20th August, 1983 has been challenged.3. That the non-petitioners Nos. 2 to 18 in writ petition No. 2579 of 1983 and non-petitioner No. 2 in the writ petition 2668 of 1983 are employees of the Municipal Board, Bilara, petitioner here in. They moved an application Under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (here in after referred to as the Act of 1947) before the Labour Court claiming the wages for overtime from 1-12-74 to 5-2-1978. The total amount claimed on account of over time came to Rs. 1,75,296.33/-.The non-petitioners were employed by the Municipal Board Bilara in connection with collecting Octroi which is the tax levied under the Rajasthan Municipalities Act. A claim petition was registered before the Labour Court and the Labour C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : (1985)ILLJ111Raj
G.M. Lodha J.1. Durante bene placito' ruled the world with waves of 'laissez faire' up to 19th century, Political as well as Industrial revolutions brought new tides of workers emancipation from exploitation resulting in new concepts of 'status', 'security of service', 'releases from bonded labour'. Not to talk of Karl Marx or Lenin, even Abraham Lincoln and Roosvelt pleaded for 'Dignity of Labour', 'Equality', Dueprocess of law, and that resulted in New Deal Legislations, Inspired by Mahatma Gandhi, the Founding fathers of the great Indian constitution brought the dream of 'Ravi' true when preamble of the 'Socialist Republic of India' embodied 'Equality' of status' and 'opportunity'. Justice, 'social, economic and political' targets 'followed' by Directives and fundamental rights of equality in Article 14 and equal opportunity in services in Article 16.2. Articulation of 14 and 16 in 1948 and 43A in 1976, whether gave death blow to 'durante bene placito' is even now a billion dollar q...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : [2007(114)FLR314]; (2007)IILLJ664Raj; RLW2007(1)Raj579
P.S. Asopa, J.1. By this appeal appellant UCO Bank (hereinafter referred to as 'the Management') has challenged order of the learned Single Judge dated 8.5.2006 dismissing SB Civil Writ Petition No. 259/2001 filed by the Management challenging Award dated 27.12.1999 passed by the Central Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') whereby the respondent Ram Prakash Prajapati (hereinafter referred to as 'the Workman') has been ordered to be reinstated with full back wages.2. The facts, in brief, as per the Management are that the Workman was engaged as part time casual worker at the rate of Rs. 12/- per day on 6.6.1986 for 1 hour and a half in the evening. However, the Workman filed the statement of claim before the Tribunal claiming himself to be full time daily rated worker. The services of the Workman were dispensed with on 18.3.1988 after following the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Against the said termina...
Tag this Judgment!