Workman In Continuous Service For Years Without Any Break Can’t Be Denied Benefit U/S 25F ID Act Merely Because Of Contractual Engagement: Gujarat HC

Workman In Continuous Service For Years Without Any Break Can’t Be Denied Benefit U/S 25F ID Act Merely Because Of Contractual Engagement

Case: Jamnagar Municipal Corporation VS Avdesh Kishorbhai Solanki

Coram: Justice AY Kogje

Case No.: C/SCA/10126/2018

Court Observation: “The fact that consecutive orders repeatedly appointing the claimant for short duration are passed from time to time, go to show that the such arrangement is a conscious decision and attempt of the respondent to give artificial breaks in the service of the claimant so as to circumvent or frustrate the statutory provisions, more particularly section 25F of the Act and to misuse, rather abuse, the provisions under clause (bb) of section 2(oo) of the Act with a view to depriving the claimant of his legal rights conferred by various provisions under different Labour Laws.”

“It is submitted that case of the petitioner-Corporation cannot be saved by Section 2(oo)(bb) in view of the fact that the contract, which the petitioner is relying upon Exh.28 was the last contract. However, first appointment of the respondent-workman was of the year 2008, wherein by order dated 25.06.2010 (Exh.18), the respondent was duly appointed. It is not the case of the petitioner-Corporation that after 2010, the respondent was discontinued for the entire period and straightaway in the year 2015, was appointed by another contract. In fact, evidence on record clearly indicates that he has continuously worked.”

Previous Posts

Assistant Teacher Recruitment: Calcutta HC Slams State For Unilaterally Reducing Aspirant’s Original Score, Orders Appointment With Retrospective Benefits

Look Out Circular: Directors Of Company Can’t Be Denied ‘Right To Travel Abroad’ In Absence Of Any Non-Compoundable Offence: Orissa High Court

Charge-Sheet Even In The State Of Its Photostat Copies Cannot Be Termed As ‘Incomplete’ For Grant Of Default Bail: J&K&L High Court

Power To Arrest Can’t Be Used As A Punitive Tool Unmindful Of Safeguards Mandated U/S 41 CrPC: Kerala High Court

“No Repugnancy With Central Act”: Supreme Court Upholds Sections 4(7),4(8) & 15 Of Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976

Section 306 IPC – Abetment Of Suicide A Heinous Offence; Cannot Be Quashed On The Basis Of Compromise: Supreme Court

Writ Of Mandamus Not A Remedy Against Private Wrongs, Court Cannot Interfere With Private Body’s Internal Management: Delhi HC

Keywords

Workman In Continuous Service, Contractual Engagement