Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Bhupatbhai vs Range

High Court Of Gujarat|20 March, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)
1. All the appeals are preferred from similar orders dated 11.02.2010 in the petitions of the appellants, whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court has treated the petitions as under Article-227 of the Constitution and refrained from interfering with the awards of the Labour Court, which were impugned before him. It was sought to be argued by learned Counsel, Ms. Kiran Pandey, appearing for the appellants, that the findings of the facts recorded by the Labour Court, in the impugned awards, particularly in respect of the number of days worked by the appellants, ought to have been relied upon by the learned Single Judge, in view of the fact that the appellants had actually worked under the respondents for so many years.
2. By previous order dated 05.07.2011, herein, of this Court(Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice S.J. Mukhopadhyay, as his Lordship then was and Justice J.B. Pardiwala)had allowed time to learned AGP to obtain instructions as to why the Court should not direct the respondents to give benefit of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in favour of the appellants-workmen.
3. It was, however, vehemently argued by the learned AGP, Ms. Monali Bhatt and fairly conceded by learned Counsel for the appellants that in view of the recent decision of this Court in "GUSTADJI DHANJISHA BUHARIWALA AND ANR. VS. NEVIL BAMANSHA BUHARIWALA & ORS.", reported in (2011) 2 GLH 147, it is categorically held that an appeal, arising from decision of a learned Single Judge rendered in exercise of powers under Article-227 of the Constitution, would not be maintainable. Therefore, there is no alternative, but, to dismiss the appeals as not maintainable and are dismissed. However, in view of the provisions of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the appellants shall be entitled to claim the benefit, if any, is due to them and shall be at liberty to agitate that issue in any other appropriate proceedings.
4. Under the circumstances, no order as to costs.
(D.H.
WAGHELA, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) Umesh/ Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Bhupatbhai vs Range

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
20 March, 2012