Employer is to prove misconduct when enquiry is dispensed with.
2011 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Claim for ''equal work, equal wages'' not tenable if not supported with evidence.
2011 LLR 6
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Similarly situated persons should be treated alike.
2011 LLR 6
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Reinstatement with full back-wages is not a rule on illegal termination.
2011 LLR 68
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Abandonment of workman will not be proved by mere statement that he failed to report for duty.
2011 LLR 13
DELHI HIGH COURT
Dismissal of salesman for embezzlement, after holding enquiry, not to be set aside.
2011 LLR 40
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
A part-time employee working under the control of an employer will be a ''workman''.
2011 LLR 52
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Removal of a dishonest bank employee is not to be interfered by Court.
2011 LLR 17
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Pendency of criminal proceedings not to justify forfeiture of gratuity.
2011 LLR 66
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Reinstatement of a contractual workman not sustainable.
2011 LLR 10
DELHI HIGH COURT
Compensation in lieu of reinstatement proper to a temporary worker.
2011 LLR 64
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Transfer outside Bangalore not legal in the absence of service condition.
2011 LLR 81
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Under Article 226, the High Court has limited powers in respect of enquiries.
2011 LLR 35
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Provident Fund authority can''t challenge the order of EPF Tribunal in the High Court.
2011 LLR 28
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No back-wages in the absence of pleadings and evidence.
2011 LLR 102
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
No damages for EPF contribution when levied after long delay.
2011 LLR 100
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Consent of the workmen is not necessary on transfer of an establishment.
2011 LLR 43
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assumption of 25% charges towards labour is not necessary for provident fund contributions.
2011 LLR 3
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Dismissal of bank employee is justified for removal of gold jewellery packet.
2011 LLR 97
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
A refrigerator in hotel will justify coverage under the ESI Act.
2011 LLR 91
DELHI HIGH COURT
A dispute, not determined by the Labour Court, is not an Award.
2011 LLR 25
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No compensation when son died while driving father''s tractor.
2011 LLR 55
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Reinstatement not proper; when the workman declined the offer of employment.
2011 LLR 22
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
An enquiry cannot be held unfair when the workman conceded that it was fair.
2011 LLR 63
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
High Court cannot act as appellate Court for correcting factual errors.
2011 LLR 63
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Disciplinary proceedings to be quashed in the absence of evidence for taking bribe.
2011 LLR 78
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Complaint by Factory Inspector has to be filed within three months.
2011 LLR 50
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Labour Court has to consider the case on merit even when the party does not appear.
2011 LLR 61
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
For making right computation, provident fund authorities must ask for specific documents.
2011 LLR 3
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Compensation, not reinstatement, is proper when appointment followed statutory procedure.
2011 LLR 102
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Reinstatement appropriate when cogent proof of date of birth is submitted.
2011 LLR 90
DELHI HIGH COURT
A letter by UPC can''t be presumed to have been received by the addressee.
2011 LLR 13
DELHI HIGH COURT
Reinstatement of an embezzler is not conducive to any organisation.
2011 LLR 40
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Three times penalty for delayed payment of minimum wages not to be interfered.
2011 LLR 33
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Compensation, instead of reinstatement, is the trend of Apex Court decisions.
2011 LLR 64
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Gratuity Act would prevail over Service Regulations.
2011 LLR 57
PATNA HIGH COURT
An unemployment affidavit is sufficient for claiming last drawn wages.
2011 LLR 77
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
For claiming compensation, employer-employee relationship must exist.
2011 LLR 75
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Compulsory retirement for misappropriation is rightly upheld by the Tribunal.
2011 LLR 35
MADRAS HIGH COURT
High standard of integrity and honesty is expected from a bank employee.
2011 LLR 85
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Forfeiture of gratuity under the Working Journalists Act is not restricted to prescribed misconducts.
2011 LLR 5
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Amount paid under the Group Insurance Accident Policy will be deducted from compensation awarded by the Accident Compensation Commissioner.
2011 LLR 72
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
A provident fund authority, exercising quasi judicial functions, can''t defend its own orders in a writ petition.
2011 LLR 27
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No time limit to refer a dispute for adjudication.
2011 LLR 104
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Reinstatement is proper when a workman is absolved of all charges.
2011 LLR 105
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Compensation, not reinstatement, is proper for daily wager.
2011 LLR 105
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Before imposing a penalty of removal, the authorities must take due precaution.
2011 LLR 105
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Right of re-employment of retrenched workman arises the moment employer engages somebody else.
2011 LLR 106
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
An Enquiry Officer will not be replaced on frivolous allegations.
2011 LLR 106
PATNA HIGH COURT
Reinstatement rightly granted to a workman who has worked for 240 days.
2011 LLR 107
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
While claiming last drawn wages for interregnum period, affidavit is enough.
2011 LLR 107
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Model Standing Orders would prevail over Service Regulations.
2011 LLR 109
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
When an officer lacked any disciplinary powers, dismissal rightly quashed.
2011 LLR 109
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Labour Court has to evaluate cause of action as per the principles of CPC.
2011 LLR 109
DELHI HIGH COURT
Termination of fixed term employment is not violation of section 33 of the ID Act.
2011 LLR 110
DELHI HIGH COURT
Pendency of a complaint under section 498A of the IPC will not be construed as doubtful antecedents of an employee.
2011 LLR 110
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Industrial Tribunal, not Labour Court, to decide bonus dispute.
2011 LLR 111
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Bonus Act makes no distinction among daily wager, temporary or permanent employee.
2011 LLR 111
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Reasons for disagreement with the findings of the Enquiry Officer must be recorded and conveyed to delinquent.
2011 LLR 111
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
No enquiry to continue after retirement.
2011 LLR 111
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
