GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. A.M. PITHADIYA
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Limited
Click here to view full judgement.
K.M. Thaker, J. -
(1.) Even after the order dated 25.01.2016, no one is present on behalf of the petitioner. Any request for pass over or adjournment is also not made. The cause list reflects that today also learned advocate for the petitioner has filed leave note.
(2.) In this view of the matter, the Court has considered it appropriate to decide the matter after hearing the learned advocate for the respondent and after considering the material available on record.
Thus, the petition is decided by separate order, though in absence of learned advocate for the petitioner.
(3.) Heard Mr. D.J. Bhatt, learned advocate for the respondent. Though served, none for petitioner. Before proceeding further, it is appropriate and necessary to mention that the learned advocate for the respondent fairly submitted that in view of the decision dated 27.11.2014 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1159 of 2014 and connected matters, wherein it is held that the persons working on the posts of Deputy Engineer and Executive Engineer and higher posts in the petitioner -board do not come within the meaning of term "Workman" as defined under Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Special Leave Petition against the said decision is rejected by the Hon'ble Apex Court the subject matter of present petition does not require further adjudication on merits and the matter can be disposed of in light of the said decision inasmuch as the provision related to age of superannuation applicable to the category of workman would not be available to the persons/officers in the category/cadre of Deputy Engineer and Executive Engineer and above.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.