Gujarat High Court
SCA/7724/1999 of GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs KANTIBHAI MOHANBHAI PRAJAPATI on 22 December 1999
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7724 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7724 of 1999
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL
============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONVersus KANTIBHAI MOHANBHAI PRAJAPATI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Petitioner MR DP KINARIWALA for Respondent.
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL
Date of decision: 22/12/1999
ORAL JUDGEMENT
By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing today.
2. The learned counsel for the respondent workman has brought a draft for Rs.11,000/- (Rs. Eleven thousand only) which the respondent has to pay to the petitioner Corporation under the award. The draft is handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the respective parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that appropriate punishment is required to be imposed on the respondent workman and accordingly, the punishment of stoppage of three increments with permanent effect is ordered to be imposed on the respondent workman. The award made by the Labour Court shall stand modified accordingly. In compliance with the award, the petitioner Corporation shall reinstate the respondent workman within two weeks from the communication of the order of this court and the respondent workman shall be entitled to wages from the date of his reinstatement.
Rule made absolute to the said extent. No order as to costs. Direct service permitted.
Date: 22/12/1999.��-----���
(ccshah)