IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for January 2013

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Coverage under EPF Act on EO''s report is not valid.
2013 LLR 1
DELHI HIGH COURT

 RPFC is empowered to direct for production of documents
2013 LLR 1
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Provident Fund coverage without verifying record is to be quashed.
2013 LLR 1
DELHI HIGH COURT

 High Court can direct for payment of gratuity to an employee.
2013 LLR 101
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 100% compensation can be awarded despite doctor''s recommendation for 40% disability.
2013 LLR 102
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Challenging enquiry is not proper by a workman who did not participate.
2013 LLR 105
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Contractor exercising control over its workers will be employer paying the wages.
2013 LLR 11
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Contract Labour (R&A) Act will not be applicable if employees engaged are less than 20.
2013 LLR 11
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 An Award by Tribunal is illegal when relationship of employer-employee not established.
2013 LLR 11
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Relationship of employer and employee is to be proved by the latter.
2013 LLR 11
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 A non-speaking order of EPF Tribunal will be unsustainable. 
2013 LLR 15
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 A non speaking order is not tenable.
2013 LLR 19
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 An ex-parte order without ascertaining about service of summon be quashed.
2013 LLR 19
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 An order without hearing is not tenable
2013 LLR 23
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Review of order under section 7A of the EPF Act is permissible.
2013 LLR 23
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Reviewing authority must hear concerned party.
2013 LLR 23
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 An order passed without issuing notice to the parties is untenable.
2013 LLR 23
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Workman has to prove 240 days of working
2013 LLR 24
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Delay is not a bar for raising industrial disputes.
2013 LLR 27
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Compensation not reinstatement will be appropriate in a belated dispute.
2013 LLR 27
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 No punishment for misconduct, if not committed within establishment.
2013 LLR 29
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement is proper when misconduct committed outside the establishment.
2013 LLR 29
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Looting of bus warrants criminal trial, not enquiry.
2013 LLR 29
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Looting of bus warrants criminal trial, not enquiry.
2013 LLR 29
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Offence by a workman would not harm reputation of Company.
2013 LLR 29
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Members of the Cooperative Society are not to be covered under Provident Fund Act.
2013 LLR 34
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 High Court will interfere with erroneous order of RPFC.
2013 LLR 34
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Employer has primary liability to deposit its own and employees'' contributions.
2013 LLR 39
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Appeal before EPF Tribunal even in rejection of review.
2013 LLR 44
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Forfeiture of gratuity only when dismissal is for prescribed misconduct under the Act.
2013 LLR 47
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Coverage under EPF Act can''t be stalled by one owner merely by maintaining separate account books
2013 LLR 48
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Functional integrality will club two firms for coverage under EPF Act.
2013 LLR 48
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Merely maintaining separate account books and tax registrations will not stall the prosecution.
2013 LLR 48
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Section 53 of the ESI Act not bars the claim for compensation against the third party.
2013 LLR 57
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 VDA or DA forms part of minimum wages.
2013 LLR 60
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Denial of hearing is untenable when employer produces records.
2013 LLR 68
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Recovering EPF dues without prescribed procedure is set aside.
2013 LLR 7
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 High Court will quash notification only if it is unconstitutional.
2013 LLR 70
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Procedure for enactment of law can''t be directed by High Court.
2013 LLR 70
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Assaulting of lady supervisor will justify dismissal.
2013 LLR 73
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Labour Court can interfere with dismissal only when it is disproportionate to the misconduct
2013 LLR 73
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Discipline is must for growth and prosperity of any institution.
2013 LLR 73
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Undue leniency by Labour Court sends a wrong signal to other employees
2013 LLR 73
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Employer can lead evidence before Labour Court when 151 employees dismissed without enquiry.
2013 LLR 80
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement of part-time sweeper lying inebriated on the floor of bank is not proper.
2013 LLR 81
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Gratuity can be calculated on higher rates when the rules so prescribe.
2013 LLR 83
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Forfeiture of gratuity without show-cause notice is not proper.
2013 LLR 83
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal after enquiry is proper when held ex-parte due to non-participation of workman.
2013 LLR 85
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement of an employee, guilty of theft, is not proper.
2013 LLR 86
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Acquittal in the criminal trial is not binding upon Labour Court .
2013 LLR 86
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Strict rules of evidence not applicable in a domestic/departmental enquiry.
2013 LLR 86
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 An employee, guilty of theft, loses confidence of the Management.
2013 LLR 86
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Rejection of review by APFO without any reason is not legal
2013 LLR 89
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Abandonment rightly presumed when unauthorised absence is for more than specified period.
2013 LLR 9
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Employer can adjust penal rent from the gratuity payable to an employee.
2013 LLR 92
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Government has rightly rejected to refer a dispute for adjudication raised after 14 years.
2013 LLR 93
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Rejection of gratuity appeal not proper when true copy was attached.
2013 LLR 94
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Termination can be challenged at the place where notice was received by the workman.
2013 LLR 96
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Unreasonable clause in a contract between parties who are not equal is violative of constitution of India .
2013 LLR 96
PATNA HIGH COURT