Gujarat High Court High Court

Appearance vs Mr Nj Shah on 23 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Appearance vs Mr Nj Shah on 23 February, 2011
Author: V. M. G.B.Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/216/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 216 of 2011
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16046 of 2010
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1269 of 2011
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 216 of 2011
 

=========================================================

 

KANTILAL
PREMJIBHAI RATHOD 

 

Versus
 

GUJARAT
STATE MACHINE TOOLS CORPORATION LTD THROUGH CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS 

 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
UT MISHRA for MR TR MISHRA
for
the Appellant  
MR NJ SHAH, AGP for Respondent No.2
 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 23/02/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)

1. We
have heard Mr. U.T. Mishra, holding the brief of Mr. T.R.
Mishra,learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This
appeal has been filed challenging order of the learned Single Judge
dated 20.12.2010. The Labour Court has passed an award in favour of
the appellant and has directed reinstatement with 25% back wages. A
further finding was recorded by the Labour Court that the
establishment, where the appellant was working, is closed since 1998.

3. The
appellant filed Special Civil Application No.16046 of 2010 and prayed
that the respondent authorities be directed to implement the award.
The learned Single Judge has rejected the Special Civil Application
on the ground that the appellant/ petitioner has adequate alternative
remedy under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

4. Two
decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant have
been distinguished.

5. We
are in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge that
the petitioner should approach the Labour Court under Section
33(C)(2)
of the Industrial Disputes Act. We do not find any merit in
this appeal. The appeal is, accordingly dismissed.

ORDER
IN CIVIL APPLICATION:

In
view of the order passed in the main Appeal, no order is passed on
this Civil Application. Civil Application stands disposed of.

(V.M.

SAHAI, J.)

(G.B.

SHAH, J.)

omkar

   

Top