Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/788/2011 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 788 of 2011
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15422 of 2010
TO
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 791 of 2011
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15425 of 2010
WITH
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 6071 of 2011
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 788 of 2011
TO
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 6074 of 2011
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 791 of 2011
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI Sd/-
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Sd/-
======================================
1.
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
NO
2.
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
NO
3.
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
NO
4.
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
NO
5.
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
NO
======================================
BHUJ
MUNICIPALITY THROUGH CHIEF OFFICER - Appellant
Versus
DAWOOD
UMAR KUMBHAR - Respondent
======================================
Appearance
:
MR
BY MANKAD for Appellant.
MR MEHUL SHAH for
Respondent.
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 28/09/2011
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
Though
only Civil Applications are listed today for hearing, with the
consent of the parties, we have taken up the main appeals for final
disposal.
2. We
have heard Mr. B. Y. Mankad, learned counsel for the appellant and
Mr. Mehul Shah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
3. These
Letters Patent Appeals have been filed by the appellant –
original petitioner challenging the judgment and order dated
21.03.2011 passed by the Learned Single Judge in Special Civil
Application Nos.15422 to 15425 of 2010 whereby the Learned Single
Judge has issued the following directions :-
“(1) The
petitioner – Nagarpalika may file appropriate applications
under Rule 26A of the Rules of 1966 before the Labour Court praying
for setting aside the ex-parte order, within a period of fifteen
days from the date of receipt of this order. It will also open for
the petitioner – Nagarpalika to prefer appropriate
applications under Rule 26B of the Rules of 1966 praying for stay of
the operation of the ex-parte orders till the applications under
Rule 26A of the Rules of 1966 are finally disposed of.
(2) The Labour
Court, on filing of such applications, shall decide the same in
accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the
respondents-workmen, within a period of six weeks thereafter.
(3) The Labour
Court shall decide such applications which may be preferred by the
petitioner – Nagarpalika without being influenced by the
present order as this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the rival claims and contentions.”
4. In
view of the above directions, since the Learned Single Judge has only
directed the appellant to file appropriate application for setting
aside the ex-parte order before the Labour Court, we do not find to
interfere in the order passed by the Learned Single Judge. It is
open for the appellant to raise all the grievances available under
the law before the Labour Court and if such applications are filed by
the appellant, the Labour Court shall decide the same in accordance
with law.
5. With
the aforesaid direction, all these Letters Patent Appeals stand
disposed of.
6. In view of disposal of main
appeals, Civil Applications do not survive and they are accordingly
disposed of.
Sd/-
[V. M. SAHAI, J.]
Sd/-
[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]
Savariya
  Â
Top