Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

Labour Court Ought To Have Given The Employer A Chance To Adduce Evidence To Prove The Charge – Gujarat High Court Remands Dismissal Case Back To Labour Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad addressed procedural irregularities in a Labour Court decision regarding the dismissal of an employee for repeated unauthorized absences. The bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Biren Vaishnav and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pranav Trivedi highlighted the necessity of allowing the employer to present evidence before making a ruling on such dismissals.

The case revolved around Rajeshbhai Ramjibhai Purabiya, a former employee of Rajkot Municipal Corporation, dismissed for repeated absences under Section 56(2) of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. The dismissal had been previously overturned by the Labour Court, which reinstated the employee with 20% back wages citing a violation of the principles of natural justice, as the employer was not given an opportunity to prove the charges due to a defective inquiry process.

Rajeshbhai was dismissed from his position as a sweeper on June 18, 2011, leading to multiple legal battles culminating in this appeal. The primary issues discussed in the court were:

Whether the Labour Court erred in reinstating the employee without allowing the Municipal Corporation to present evidence.

The application of principles of natural justice concerning procedural fairness in the dismissal process.

The High Court meticulously analyzed the previous proceedings and emphasized that the Labour Court should have permitted the employer to lead evidence to establish the charges of misconduct. Justice Biren Vaishnav noted, “A defective inquiry or no inquiry stands on the same footing,” referencing Apex Court precedents which support the need for an employer to have an opportunity to justify dismissals when procedural errors are present.

Justice Vaishnav further elaborated on the necessity of procedural justice, stating, “When a case of dismissal or discharge of an employee is referred for industrial adjudication, the labour court should first decide whether the domestic enquiry has violated the principles of natural justice.” The court criticized the Labour Court’s oversight in not addressing this crucial procedural aspect as a preliminary issue, which ultimately affects the fairness of the judicial process.

Decision of the High Court The High Court set aside the orders of both the Labour Court and the Single Judge, remanding the matter back to the Labour Court with directions to allow the Rajkot Municipal Corporation to present evidence substantiating the dismissal of Rajeshbhai Ramjibhai Purabiya. The case must be decided within six months, with both parties expected to cooperate fully in the expedited proceedings.

Date of Decision: April 29, 2024

Rajkot Municipal Corporation vs. Rajeshbhai Ramjibhai Purabiya

Latest Legal News