High Court dismissed the petition challenging the Labour Court's order which held that the termination of an ad-hoc workman was unjustified and approved an award regarding minimum wages and back wages.
The petition was dismissed and the Labour Court's order dated 24.03.2000 was upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writs No. 646312009
1.State of Rajasthan through Director, Medical & Health Department, Jaipur. 2.The Officer in charge, Leprosy Control Unit, Bharatpur.
----Defendantslpetitioners
Versus
Raman Lal son of Prem Chand Saini, resident of Malipura post Saver Dlsstrjict .Bharatpa. .." , .Z- . A 't .. , b9: -' = 6 V iA, i " dC-?f----~espondent - - 7, rq "*- .. --/- TJ' . For ~etitio"~e:(s) - : Mr. M.A. Khan, Dy.G.C. 19+' I For Respondent(s)
't \ '
HON'BLE MR. SHARMA
29/08/2098
., 1
w, w.e.f. 01.10.1995 as unjus,tm& nd:leg?lS ~,i< ..#$$!E$ XG.8 ."* - 7 i*
decision dated 3lSt July, 1996 has held the workman to -, be entitled t. the minimum wages on the post of chowkidar and thejneervening .f. wages have also been released in favour of the workman. Findings of facts arrived at by the authority under the MLnimum Wages Act, have not been assailed before any court a.nd thus the contention of the, I.earned counsel for the petitioners cannot be substantiated that the respondent-workman was a part time worker. 'ii r 'iz i d, 2 g2q1 4. Thus the teKmi.fiti& tS8f the d <ep6n~dent-workman, who ir ='+ ."i g '. ib- .-a <? $ 3-3 worked for a,@riod from 02.11.1988 to 31.11>J1995 without ;<. 7.' - P .*& JA .., d Lcompliance.of the provision contained under ectidnd5 F of the &%'# r *a.* J. ,Zx, t Act of 1947 was held to be unjustified and this Court does not find termination till the has also been passed on the basis fact that the workman has and has also stated before 5. Thus, I bo not call a. *. accordingly disniised.$4be.,~~.@td passeil by the Labour Court =. %. ->,,--. ...w..=m f * -2" li 5 '\ 1 dated 24.03.2000 is upheld.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),I
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the termination of the workman was unjustified considering he was appointed on an ad-hoc basis.
Whether the workman was entitled to reinstatement and forty per cent back wages.
Whether the findings of the Minimum Wages Authority established the nature of employment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Rajasthan through Director, Medical & Health Department, Jaipur
The Officer in charge, Leprosy Control Unit, Bharatpur
Raman Lal son of Prem Chand Saini
Sanjeev Prakash Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
