Labour & Service
ID Act |Right To Claim Interest Is Pre-Existing Right Only If Explicitly Provided In Contract Of Employment Or Service Conditions: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court single bench of Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar held that the right to claim interest could be considered a pre-existing right or benefit only if explicitly determined in the contract of employment or in the resolutions governing service conditions. However, it held that neither the contract of employment nor the service conditions of the Workman outlined...
Labour & Service Weekly Round-Up: 22nd April to 28th April 2024
Allahabad High CourtIndustrial Disputes Act | Labour Court Has Ample Power To Examine Correctness Of Finding Of Inquiry Officer In Discharge Or Dismissal Order: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: Charan Pal Singh vs. Presiding Officer Labour Court Second Up Ghaziabad And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 264Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 264The Allahabad High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh...
Labour Court's Orders Can't Be Executed Via Writ Before High Court, Workman Must Approach Labour Court First: Uttarakhand High Court
The Uttarakhand High Court single bench of Justice Pankaj Purohit held that High Courts are not executing courts for the purposes of giving effect to the reliefs granted by the Labour Courts. Matters of implementation and execution fall within the domain of Labour Courts only, in line with Order 21 of the CPC, 1908. Brief Facts: The Petitioner (“Workman”) was employed as...
Industrial Disputes Act Inapplicability Of Sections 25F And 25N If Workman Fails To Work Continuously For One Year: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Writ Petition
TheMadhya Pradesh High Courtsingle bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal recently dismissed a writ petition and held that since the Workman didn't work continuously for one year under an employer, provisions of theIndustrial Disputes Act, 1947 such as Section 25F and Section 25N had no application to the facts and circumstances of the case. Brief Facts: The Petitioner (“Workman”), a...
Disputes About Promotion And Seniority Fall Within Definition Of 'Industrial Disputes', Labour Court Has Jurisdiction To Adjudicate: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court single bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal held that disputes related to promotion and seniority fall within the scope of industrial disputes as defined under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Therefore, being a forum established by the ID Act, the Labour Court has the rightful jurisdiction to adjudicate on such matters. Brief...
Writ Of Certiorari Can't Be Used To Dispute Industrial Tribunal's Factual Findings: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court single bench of Justice Sanjay Vashisth upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the limited scope of appellate jurisdiction under Article 226, focused on rectifying legal errors rather than factual disputes, and highlighted the importance of maintaining the integrity of lower courts and tribunals. The writ was filed by the Management after it...
Educational Institutions Not Obligated To Conduct Formal Disciplinary Proceedings Before Terminating Temporary Workmen: Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court single bench of Justice Anil Verma held that the termination of the Worklady's services was justified due to unsatisfactory performance and loss of confidence in the Management, nullifying the Labour Court's award of reinstatement and back-wages. The bench noted that the Worklady was not a permanent employee, therefore, formal disciplinary proceedings...
Reinstatement With Back Wages Is Not Automatic Even In Cases Of Illegal Termination, Courts Might Provide Lumpsum Compensation: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court division bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that reinstatement with back wages isn't automatic for illegally terminated workers. Lump sum compensation might be provided instead, considering factors like the nature of employment and length of service. Brief Facts: The Workmen initiated proceedings before the labour court in Rajkot...
Workman Can't Claim Promotion When His Services Are Not Regularized, Punjab And Haryana High Court Dismisses Writ Petition
The Punjab and Haryana High Court single bench of Justice Namit Kumar held that a workman cannot claim promotion at a date when his services were not regularized. The bench dismissed a writ petition filed by a workman who was allegedly not promoted by the Management despite being in a higher position in the seniority list. The suit for declaration was also filed 10 years later from...
Imposing Multiple Punishments Cumulatively On Workman For One Single Act Violates Principle Of Double Jeopardy: Punjab And Haryana High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court (“High Court”) single bench of Justice Sanjay Vashisth held that imposition of two punishments cumulatively for one single act of the Workman violates the principle of double jeopardy. The High Court noted that the Labour Court imposed two penalties on the Workman, depriving him of one increment and back wages simultaneously. The High Court...
Individuals Involved In Manual Work Are Considered Workmen Under ID Act, In Absence Of Direct Oversight Over Subordinates In Supervisory Role: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court single bench of Justice Amit Borkar held that employees predominantly engaged in manual, skilled, and unskilled work, in absence of sufficient evidence of direct oversight of subordinate employees, qualify as 'workmen' under Section 2(s) of the ID Act. Brief Facts: The Management, an engineering company, was involved in manufacturing various products,...
Industrial Disputes Act Time Consumed In Proceedings At Forum Lacking Jurisdiction Is Excluded From Limitation Period: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court single bench of Justice Sandeep Sharma held that if an applicant has diligently pursued a matter before a wrong forum and time was consumed in doing so, this time should be excluded from the limitation period before the forum with appropriate jurisdiction. The bench noted that the Workman could only approach the Industrial Tribunal after the expiry of...