Labour & Service
No Recovery Permissible From Retiral Benefits Of Employee Holding Class-III Post On Grounds Of Excess Payment.: Manipur High Court
A single judge bench of the Manipur High Court comprising of Justice Ahanthem Bimol Singh while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Smt. W. Manileima Devi. vs State of Manipur & Ors. has held that no recovery can be made from retiral benefits of an employee holding Class-III post on grounds of excess payment. Background Facts W. Manileima Devi (Petitioner) was...
Wages Are Earned Right And Not A Charity, Due Wages Is Fundamental Right Of Worker Under Article 21:Central Administrative Tribunal Cuttack
The Central Administrative Tribunal Cuttack bench of Sudhi Ranjan Mishra (Judicial Member) and Pramod Kumar Das (Administrative Member) held that wages are earned right and not a charity. It held that payment of due wages is a fundamental right of a worker under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The bench held that the act of the Management in availing the services...
Period Spent By Employees In Other Regions Has To Be Counted For Purposes For Consideration Of Promotion: Allahabad Central Administrative Tribunal
The Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad bench of Justice Rajiv Joshi and Dr. Sanjiv Kumar held that the period spent by the employees in other regions prior to transfer on compassionate ground, has to be counted for the purposes of eligibility for consideration of promotion. Brief Facts: The applicants held positions as Stenographer-II under Central Board of...
Management Can't Initiate Recovery Of Overpayment Unless Fraud/Misrepresentation Can Be Proven On Workman's Part: Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad
The Central Administrative Tribunal (Allahabad) single bench of Justice Om Prakash (Judicial Member) held that recovery of overpayment cannot be initiated by the Management unless fraud or misrepresentation can be proven on the part of the Workman. The matter pertained to a Workman who mistakenly entered the wrong date in his promotion form. Thereafter, the Management initiated...
Interruption In Service Due To Accident Would Not Amount To Break In Service For The Purpose Of S. 2A Of Gratuity Act: Calcutta High Court
A single judge bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising of Justice Arindam Mukherjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of M/s. Dalhousie Jute Company Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. has held that non-rendering of uninterrupted service due to accident would not amount to break in service for the purposes of Section 2A of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972...
Government Employee Has No Vested Right To Particular Duty, Assigning Duty Is Prerogative Of Employer: Kolkata Central Administrative Tribunal
The Central Administrative Tribunal Kolkata bench of Suchitto Kumar Das (Administrative Member) held that a Government employee has no vested right to a particular duty. It held that assigning duty to an employee is the prerogative of the employer who has to take decisions in this regard based on available resources, rules in force and financial...
Question Referred Under S. 17(2) Of Working Journalists Act Cannot Be Construed As Industrial Dispute Under ID Act: Madras High Court
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice N.Mala while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of S. Madhavan vs M/s THG Publishing Pvt. Ltd. has held that a question that is referred to a labour court under section 17(2) of the Working Journalists Act cannot be construed as an Industrial Dispute under section 2(k) of the ID Act. Background Facts M/s...
Employer who got Sufficient Opportunity To Defend Claim Before Assistant Labour Officer Cannot Approach High Court Claiming Prejudice: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court single bench of Justice Murali Purushothaman held that the employer was provided sufficient opportunity to defend the claim before the authority cannot approach the High Court alleging that she was not given sufficient opportunity to defend the claim. Brief Facts: The Inspector initiated Minimum Wages proceedings against the Petitioner, alleging that...
Dismissal From Service Is Disproportionate For Misconduct Of Overwriting Reasons Of Absence On Gatepass: Bombay High Court
A single judge bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice Sandeep V. Marne while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Danfoss Systems Ltd vs Johnson Gomes has held that dismissal of service of a workman was disproportionate for an offence of overwriting the reason of absence on the Gatepass. Background Facts Johnson Gomes (Workman) was working in the factory of...
Departmental Proceedings And Proceedings In Criminal Case Can Proceed Simultaneously: CAT Jabalpur
The Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur bench of Justice Akhil Kumar Srivastava (Judicial Member) and Kumar Rajesh Chandra (Administrative Member) held that departmental proceedings and proceedings in criminal case can proceed simultaneously, as there is no bar in their being conducted simultaneously, though separately. It held that the purpose of departmental enquiry and...
When Termination Is Found To Be Illegal, Reinstatement With Full Back Wages Shall Not Be Awarded Mechanically: Delhi High Court Reiterates
A single bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of AIIMS vs Ashok Kumar has held that when the termination is found to be illegal, grant of reinstatement with full back wages has to be provided as per the facts and circumstances of each case and shall not be awarded mechanically. Background Facts Ashok...
Assistant Labour Commissioner Not Competent To Decide Complaint Filed By Inspector Under Minimum Wages Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court (“High Court”) single bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia held that the Assistant Labour Commissioner is not a competent authority to decide the claims arising out of payment of less than the minimum rates of wages under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. It held that the Assistant Labour Commissioner is not competent to decide the complaint filed by...