Percentage of disability of accident compensation is to be assessed by qualified medical officer.
2017 LLR 1 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Order rejecting review application is not appealable.
2017 LLR 10 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Complaint for signing under force by EPF Inspectors untenable when no report filed with police. and Reviewing authority must provide opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
2017 LLR 17 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Gratuity can't be withheld merely due to pendency of criminal case and Rejecting review application sans notice for hearing of employer is illegal.
2017 LLR 18 ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Incentive for production not to attract provident fund contributions and Any payment made to all employees would attract provident fund contribution.
2017 LLR 24 MADRAS HIGH COURT
Denial of representation by a lawyer to the delinquent will vitiate enquiry conducted by Retd. Judge and Punishment will be quashed when the enquiry is vitiated.
2017 LLR 3 DELHI HIGH COURT
Plea of abandonment without notice to workman is not sustainable and Lump sum compensation on reinstatement appropriate when job duration was only 3 years.
2017 LLR 35 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Lessor and lessee would be jointly and severely liable to pay provident fund arrears as per 17(s) 17(b) of the Act.
2017 LLR 36 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Any person appointed directly or indirectly for wages will be covered by provident fund and Attendance wage register not cogent evidence if not authenticated by government agency and EPF Authority may insist the employer for installation of CCTV cameras around factory premises for ascertaining workmen employed.
2017 LLR 39 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Control and supervision of principal employer will be decisive to cover the workers of contractors under ESI and Exclusion of home workers from coverage under ESI has to be established with reasons and Mere right to reject the end product not sufficient to conclude that employer is having supervision and control.
2017 LLR 47 KERALA HIGH COURT
Appeal to tribunal to be dismissed on failing to comply the condition of pre-deposit.
2017 LLR 6 DELHI HIGH COURT
Workers for maintenance of building and electrical job etc. are to be covered under EPF Act and Principal employer liable if contractor fails to remit EPF contributions and On paying EPF contributions by contractor, the principal employer can recover it.
2017 LLR 63 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Depositing of ESI contribution after initiation of criminal proceedings would not mitigate offence.
2017 LLR 68 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Consuming alcohol on duty justifies dismissal from service and An employee failing to rebut the charges as levied, will be presumed as guilty.
2017 LLR 70 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
No limitation is provided for assessment and recovery of damages.
2017 LLR 72 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Court will not interfere in punishment when enquiry is held as fair and proper and Labour Court/Tribunal can interfere in punishment only in dismissal or discharge of workman.
2017 LLR 74 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Registered cooperative society employing less than 50 workers not to be covered under the Act and Principal employer will deduct and deposit the contributions of employees of contractor.
2017 LLR 76 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Investigation report by Executive Engineer can't be a substitute for enquiry.
2017 LLR 78 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Prerogative to hire an employee is entirely of the employer and Supervision, payment of salary to workers of contractor will make the principal employer liable for EPF contributions.
2017 LLR 8 DELHI HIGH COURT
Compensation from ESI for injuries to debar the employee claiming under any law.
2017 LLR 80 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Identification of employees is to be made before determination of money under S.7-A of the Act. and Provident Fund contributions are for the welfare of employees can't be treated as tax.
2017 LLR 83 PATNA HIGH COURT
Appointment of an employee without requisite qualifications can be terminated any time.
2017 LLR 84 RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
A liability fixed by EPF Authority on the employer without any notice or opportunity, is not sustainable.
2017 LLR 87 ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Non-appearance of workman due to ill health, is sufficient cause for setting aside of ex-parte order.
2017 LLR 91 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
No employee can claim for retirement at 60 when the Standing Orders provide at 58 years.
2017 LLR 92 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Transfer of fitter from Faridabad to Pondicherry is victimization to be set aside and An award of Labour Court, contrary to the reference, is to be set aside and Cause of action would arise at Faridabad when the workman was transferred from Faridabad to Pondicherry.
2017 LLR 93 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Abandonment of service can't be presumed in absence of notice to workman without enquiry.