Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.61 seconds)
Documents citing Purshottambhai R. Kachhadia vs State Of Gujarat And Ors. on 5 November, 1999

Surat Mahila Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs Mamtaben Mahendrabhai Joshi on 15 April, 2000

In case of Purshottambhai R. Kachhadiya (supra) which was a case of a daily wager appointed for fixed period and given break, post on which he worked while working on a work-charge employee. In that case, it was the only contention raised by the petitioner that said termination was violative of Section 25F of the I. D. Act but no submissions were made in respect to the fact that the employer has misused the power and termination is vitiated with mala fide. No such contention was raised before this Court and after considering the case of M. Venugopalan & Ramesh Gehlot, this Court has held that irrespective of length of service, termination would not amount to retrenchment if there is a provision under the said contract for termination of employment. The learned Sr. Advocate has thus submitted that if the appointment has been made on periodical basis and a stipulation has been provided and by afflux of time if the service has come to an end, that covers the exception clause (bb), and therefore, it does not amount to 'retrenchment'.
Gujarat High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 16 - H K Rathod - Full Document

Tourism vs Nasibbhai on 20 July, 2012

So far as, reliance placed upon the above mentioned three decisions in case of Allahabad Bank Vs. Prem Singh (supra), Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi And Others Vs. State of Bihar And Others (supra) and Purshottambhai R. Kachhadia Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. (supra), are concerned the Court is of the considered view that the decisions of the Court do not help the petitioner in any manner, as the facts of the present case and the aspect of pleadings would be sufficient to held that these facts are not to be governed by the ratio laid down in the said authorities.
Gujarat High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - S R Brahmbhatt - Full Document

Surat Mahila Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs Mamtaben Mahendrabhai Joshi C/O Sharad ... on 21 April, 2001

Reference is made to a decision in Purshottambhai R. Kachhadia v. State of Gujarat & Ors., 2000 (1) G.L.H. 553, where a learned single Judge of this Court has taken a view that in case of termination of daily wager, who is appointed for a fixed period and is given break, and when posted on different works, while working as a work charged employee, if the contract of employment is terminated after coming into force of Section 2(oo)(bb), termination would not amount to retrenchment if there is a provision under such contract for termination of employment.
Gujarat High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 1 - P Majmudar - Full Document

Surat Mahila Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. vs Mamtaben Mahendrabhai Joshi on 21 April, 2001

Reference is made to a decision in Purshottambhai R. Kachhadia v. State of Gujarat and Ors., 2000 (1) GLH 553, where a learned single Judge of this Court has taken a view that in case of termination of daily wager, who is appointed for a fixed period and is given break, and when posted on different works, while working as a work charged employee, if the contract of employment is terminated after coming into force of Section 2(oo)(bb), termination would not amount to retrenchment, if there is a provision under such contract for termination of employment.
Gujarat High Court Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - P Majmudar - Full Document
1