Gujarat High Court
SCA/818/1998 of G S R T C Vs JOGENDRABHAI MANIYABHAI CHAUDHARI on 25 November 1998
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 818 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 818 of 1998
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR
============================================================
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.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question 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?
-------------------------------------------------------------- G S R T CVersus JOGENDRABHAI MANIYABHAI CHAUDHARI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: M/S THAKKAR ASSOC. for Petitioner MR DH WAGHELA for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.N.MATHUR Date of decision: 25/11/98
ORAL JUDGEMENT
RULE.
Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. On the misconduct of misappropriation being proved in the domestic enquiry, a penalty of dismissal was inflicted on the respondent workman by the petitioner corporation. On the industrial dispute being raised, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court, Surat. The respondent-workman did not challenge the proceedings of the domestic enquiry. Considering the fact that the misconduct was of a technical nature, the Labour Court substituted the penalty and directed to reinstate the workman without backwages.
2. It is contended by the learned Advocate for the Corporation that once the misconduct was proved, some sort of penalty was required to be inflicted. I find substance in the contention of the petitioner. Considering all facts of the case, if the penalty of dismissal is substituted by penalty of stoppage of one increment simplicitor.
3. Consequently, this Special Civil Application is partly allowed. The award of the Labour Court dated 24.2.1997 is modified to the extent that the penalty of dismissal is substituted by the penalty of stoppage of one increment simplicitor. The award directing the petitioner to reinstate without backwages remains intact. Rule made partly absolute.
...
msp.