Gujarat High Court High Court

Balubhai vs Bharitya on 26 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Balubhai vs Bharitya on 26 October, 2010
Author: M.R. Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14143/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14143 of 2010
 

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


 

BALUBHAI
SARMANBHAI KARMTA - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

BHARITYA
AGRO INDUSTRIES FOUNDATION - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MS
TEJAL K SHAH for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 26/10/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction
quashing and setting aside the impugned judgement and award dated
25/02/2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court,
Junagadh in Reference (L.C.J.) No. 118/2004 by which the Labour
Court, Junagadh has dismissed/rejected the Reference.

2. Having
heard Ms. Tejal Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and considering the impugned judgement and award, more
particularly, considering the fact that the petitioner has failed to
prove by leading evidence that he worked for more than 240 days in
the last preceding year and considering the fact that the petitioner
did not appear before the Labour Court and did not lead any evidence
and even did not examine himself and when the petitioner failed to
prove that he worked for more than 240 days in the last preceding
year and consequently when the Labour Court has rejected/dismissed
the Reference, it cannot be said that the Labour Court has committed
an error/illegality, which calls for the interference of this Court
in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. In
view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, there is no
substance in the present petition, which deserves to be dismissed and
is accordingly dismissed.

(M.R.

SHAH, J.)

siji

   

Top