SURENDRANAGAR JILLA MAJDOOR SANGH v. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 11. Special Civil Application No. 13112 of 2000 MRS DT SHAH for Petitioners No. 1-2 Mr. H.D. Dave, AGP for Respondents No. 1,4 NOTICE SERVED for Respondents No. 2,5 MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent No. 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD Date of decision: 18/02/2002…
Judgment
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD ============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- SURENDRANAGAR JILLA MAJDOOR SANGH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
Special Civil Application No. 13112 of 2000 MRS DT SHAH for Petitioners No. 1-2 Mr. H.D. Dave, AGP for Respondents No. 1,4 NOTICE SERVED for Respondents No. 2,5 MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent No. 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD Date of decision: 18/02/2002 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Heard learned advocate Mrs. D.T.Shah for the petitioner, Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the panchayat authorities and Mr. H.D. Dave, learned AGP for the State authorities. In this petition, the petitioner has raised the grievance that the award made by the Industrial Tribunal Rajkot in Reference (IT) No. 912 of 1984 and 342 of 1985 dated 24th November, 1993 has not been implemented by the respondents no. 2 and 3. Mrs. Shah has submitted that this award was challenged by the Surendranagar District Panchayat before this Court by filing special civil application and then by filing letters patent appeal and the appeal has also been dismissed and, therefore, the award has become final and the same is required to be implemented by the respondent No.
2 and 3. Present petition has been filed with a grievance about the non implementation of the award. Mrs. Shah has submitted that the authority concerned is not taking any action though complaint has been filed for taking action under section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. (cid:9)In this petition, rule has been issued by this Court on 7th September, 2001 and some interim directions have been issued by directing the State Government to take appropriate decision for implementation of the award in question. By order dated 7th September, 2001, the respondent No.1 has been directed to take immediate decision to regularize the services of the concerned workmen. Learned advocate Mrs. Shah has submitted that till this date, the award in question has not been implemented by the panchayat authorities. In view of these facts, learned advocate Mr. Munshaw appearing for the panchayat authorities has submitted that earlier, this court has directed to implement the award in question on or before 30th October, 2001 and, therefore, they have filed civil application no.
Operative part
11810 of 2001 for extension of time to implement the award in question. He has, therefore, prayed for granting some further period for implementing the award in question. (cid:9)In view of these facts, it is directed to the respondents no. 2 and 3 to implement the award made by the Industrial Tribunal, Rajkot dated 24th November, 1993 in Reference (IT) No. 912 of 1984, 913 of 1984 and 343 of 1985 within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order without fail, otherwise, necessary action will be taken by this Court against the concerned respondents. It is also directed to the State authorities to cooperate with the proposal from the panchayat authorities for implementation of the award in question. (cid:9)With these observations and directions, this petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs. (cid:9)In view of the order passed in the main matter, Civil Application No. 12069 of 2001 as well as civil application no. 11810 of 2001 shall not survive. Same are, therefore, disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. Dt.18.2.2002(cid:9) (cid:9)(H.K. Rathod,J.) #Vyas# (cid:9)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — s. 29.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 18 Feb 2002. The bench was H K RATHOD.
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.