AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION v. RAMDULARE SHIVRATAN
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 13 Dec 1996
- Bench
- S K KESHOTE
Outcome
Allowed
Applications are allowed and the order of the Labour
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Versus RAMDULARE SHIVRATAN -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: In both the Sp.Civil Applications: MR DV MEHTA for Petitioner None present for Respondent -------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 13/12/96 ORAL JUDGEMENT…
Judgment
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================
Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
Operative part
Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Versus RAMDULARE SHIVRATAN -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: In both the Sp.Civil Applications: MR DV MEHTA for Petitioner None present for Respondent -------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 13/12/96 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. As both the matters proceed on same facts and grounds they are being disposed of by this common order. (cid:9)The petitioner has challenged in these Special Civil Applications the order of the Labour court made on application of the respondents filed by them under sec.33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for computation of overtime allowance, and the amount of allowance has been computed. (cid:9)The counsel for the petitioner contended that under sec.33-C(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947, the Labour court has no jurisdiction to compute the amount of overtime. (cid:9)I have already taken a view in many matters that under sec.33-C(2) of the I.D. Act, 1947, the Labour court has no jurisdiction to compute the claim of overtime allowance. This view has been taken by me relying on a Supreme Court decision. (cid:9)In the result, both these Special Civil Applications are allowed and the order of the Labour court dated 20th November, 1984 made in Recovery Applications No.1152/79 and 1203/80 is quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute in both the cases with no order as to costs. (cid:9) ********** zgs/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Applications are allowed and the order of the Labour
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 13 Dec 1996. The bench was S K KESHOTE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.