Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 48 - 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 59]

Nominal IndexDharmendra Ravipratap Rajak v. State Of Gujarat Hirenbhai Hiteshbhai Patel v. State Of Gujarat Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service v. Bodar Augustin Bhurjibhai J. v. State Of Gujarat (Name Concealed Intentionally) Maheshbhai Bhurjibhai Damor v. State Of Gujarat & 3 Other(S) Parulben Natwarlal Patel v. State Of Gujarat New India Assurance Co Ltd v. Mukeshbhai Bhimsingbhai Rajput & 4 Other(S)Solanki Vipulkumar Virabhai v. Institute Of Banking Personnel Section (IBPS) Dinesh Sharan Thakur v. Dr. M K Shah Medical College And Research Centre Gujarat Rajya Hotel Federation & 9 Other(S) v. State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) Kiritkumar Ravjibhai Sharma v. Principal/Trustee Saraswati Kadavni Mandal Yogi Infrastructure Private Limited v. Rmc Redimix (India), Subsidiary Of Prism Cement Ltd.Roundup1. Public Interest Has Precedence Over Private Interest: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Stall Redevelopment Of Public Housing BlocksCase Title: DHARMENDRA RAVIPRATAP RAJAK Versus STATE OF GUJARATCase Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 48]The Gujarat High Court has refused to stall the redevelopment work being carried out in Public Housing Blocks, noting that public interest will always have precedence over a private interest of the parties. Justice Vaibhavi Nanavati observed, "Some inconvenience to individual dwellers cannot be given any primacy and public interest as well as public benefit has to be taken into consideration."2. Prior Interim Protection No Ground To Grant Anticipatory Bail: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: HIRENBHAI HITESHBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARATCase Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 49]"Merely granting protection for long time would not be a ground to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused, when the applicant is otherwise disentitled for anticipatory bail", the Gujarat High Court has held. Justice Ilesh J. Vora was hearing an application under Section 438 of CrPC seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with an FIR for offences under Sections 307, 397, 452, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 504 and 506(2) of IPC.3. Public Service, Nature Of Misconduct Of Employee Significant Considerations U/S 11 Industrial Disputes Act: Gujarat High Court Case Title: Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service vs Bodar Augustin BhurjibhaiCase Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 50]The Gujarat High Court has held that while exercising its powers under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Labour Courts/ Tribunals must factor in the nature of employment, whether public or private.Section 11A empowers Labour Courts/ Tribunals to lessen the punishment of 'discharge or dismissal from service' for employee's misconduct and direct reinstatement on such terms and conditions, if any, as it thinks fit.4. Ensure That All Police Stations Have Lawyers' Panel To Aid Sexual Assault Victims: Gujarat High Court Directs DGPCase title - J. v. State Of Gujarat (name concealed intentionally)Case Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 51]The Gujarat High Court recently directed the Director General of Police, Gujarat State to ensure that all the police stations in the state have a panel of lawyers to aid the victims of the sexual assault crimes in accordance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in a 1995 decision.The Bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee issued this order after noting that the Supreme Court had issued, inter alia, the following 4 directions in Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum vs. Union of India [(1995) 1 SCC 14], and which are not being followed in the state of Gujarat5. Parties Would Be Put In 'Embarrassing Position' Not Ground To Dispense Departmental Inquiry: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: MAHESHBHAI BHURJIBHAI DAMOR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 other(s)Case Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 52]The Gujarat High Court has recently affirmed that in dispensing with departmental inquiry, the authority must arrive at a satisfaction that it is not reasonably practicable to follow the procedure and it must record reason to show that such satisfaction is arrived at on objective facts and not on whims and caprice.Further, Justice Sangeeta Vishen observed that parties concerned will be put in an embarrassing position cannot be a ground to dispense with the inquiry.6. No Relaxation In Requirements Stipulated In Recruitment Advertisement Unless Power Is Specifically Reserved: Gujarat High CourtCase Title: PARULBEN NATWARLAL PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARATCase Citation: [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 53]"When a particular schedule is mentioned in an advertisement, the same has to be scrupulously maintained. There cannot be any relaxation in terms and conditions of the advertisement unless such a power is reserved," the Gujarat High Court held recently.The Bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav made this observation in a Special Civil Application filed by one Parulben Patel, seeking ...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round-Up [2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 48 - 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 59]

Shrutika Pandey

Tags