Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.48 seconds)
Documents citing State Of Gujarat vs Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai on 3 May, 2003

Virender Singh vs Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd., ... on 16 December, 2004

In that context, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also examined the Division Bench judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Hanuman Prasad's case (supra), other judgment of Kerala High Court in Bhaskaran v. Kerala State Electricity Board, 1986 K.L.T. 447 as also single Bench judgment of Allahabad High Court in U.P. State Electricity Board and Ors. v. P.O. Labour Court, Kanpur and Ors., 1998(7) F.L.R. 511 and the contrary view reflected in Ballkhan Doskhan Joya and Gujarat Electricity Board, 2002(92) F.L.R. 914 and Single Bench judgment Gujarat High Court in State of Gujarat and Anr. v. Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai, 2004(102) F.L.R. 347 and a decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.P. Electricity Board and Ors. v. Basant Kumar and Ors., 1989 J.L.J. 258, but ultimately held that the view taken by Rajasthan, Kerala and Allahabad High Courts appears to be in consonance with the view taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The view taken by Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh High Court was not approved.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

U.P. State Electricity Board vs Shri Shiv Mohan Singh And Anr on 1 October, 2004

As against this our attention was also invited to a decision of Division Bench of Gujarat High Court between Ballkhan Doskhan Joya and Gujarat Electricity Board reported in 2002 (92) FLR 914. The Gujarat High Court has taken the view that as a result of non-registration of contract of apprenticeship an incumbent shall not be deemed to be a trainee and he would be covered by the definition of 'workman' under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and he will get the protection of Section 25-F of the said Act. Similarly, Single Judge of Gujarat High Court took the same view in the case of State of Gujarat & Anr. vs. Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai reported 2004 (102) FLR 347.
Supreme Court of India Cites 54 - Cited by 157 - A K Mathur - Full Document

Ranbir Singh vs Presiding Officier on 21 November, 2011

We must record that learned counsel for the respondent Workman relied upon a decision of the Learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court in the case of State of Gujarat and Another vs. Chauhan Ramjibhai Karsanbhai reported in 2005 LLR 155 to contend that when termination of a workman is held to be illegal and void ab initio, the appropriate course would be to grant him full wages on his reinstatement when the employer fails to prove gainful employment of the workman during the intervening period.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - R N Raina - Full Document

State Of Gujarat vs Chandulal Vitthaldas Ratandhayra & on 28 April, 2015

6. Learned advocate Mr. Chitan Popat for the respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Modi for the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 supported the impugned judgment and order of acquittal Page 3 of 5 R/CR.A/1265/2004 JUDGMENT and he submitted that learned trial Judge has rightly appreciated the evidence produced on record and therefore, no interference is required to be called for. He lastly submitted that present appeal may kindly be dismissed by confirming the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. In this regard, learned advocate Mr. Modi also cited the decisions of this Court passed in Criminal Appeal Nos. (i) 842 of 2009 dated 28.1.2010, (ii) 900 of 1998 dated 18.8.2009 (iii) 448 of 2011 dated 5.4.2011 as well as the decisions reported in 2007(1) FAC 461 in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. Barkatali Pyarali Hasnani and ors. and 2007(2) FAC 35 in the case of State of Gujarat Vs. Rambhai Karsanbhai Malam.
Gujarat High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Z K Saiyed - Full Document
1