Fixed-term employees are entitled to parity w.r.t. working hours, wages, allowances and other benefits.
2026 LLR 24
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
No forfeiture of gratuity when the employee was convicted in a cheque bounce case.
2026 LLR 36
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
IC cannot conduct its proceedings at the residence of the complainant.
2026 LLR 59
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Mere deposit of embezzled amount will not absolve an employee of the misconduct.
2026 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Principal employer can't be forced to produce the attendance records of the contrac-tor's workers.
2026 LLR 54
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
No conferment of protection to a worker against whom disciplinary proceedings were pending.
2026 LLR 4
DELHI HIGH COURT
Providing different VRS offers to different employees would not amount to discrimination.
2026 LLR 67
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No liability to employ an apprentice in the absence of such provision in the recruitment policy.
2026 LLR 41
DELHI HIGH COURT
Mere continuation of service of fixed-term employees does not entitle them to regularization in the absence of exploitation.
2026 LLR 24
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Retention of company property beyond cessation of employment is illegal.
2026 LLR 49
DELHI HIGH COURT
Settlement entered into during the course of conciliation is binding on the union which was not a party to it.
2026 LLR 17
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Putting explosives inside an establishment premises is a grave misconduct justifying dismissal.
2026 LLR 46
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Industrial Tribunal to permit representation through advocate when employer was not legally trained.
2026 LLR 9
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
IC report, if not signed by all the members without sufficient cause, would be unsustainable.
2026 LLR 59
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
In matters of wage revision, management cannot cite past losses when it was profitable in recent years.
2026 LLR 30
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Contract would not be sham and camouflage merely because the relevant licence was not obtained.
2026 LLR 54
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Status of protected worker can't be granted only because there was employer-employee relationship.
2026 LLR 4
DELHI HIGH COURT
Employees cannot contend that VRS was obtained by force when they readily accepted it.
2026 LLR 67
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Proceedings for determination of dues to only be initiated if EO's report is approved by compliance branch.
2026 LLR 87
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No demand of interest when principal amount was recovered and damages were stayed.
2026 LLR 108
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
No recovery proceedings can be initiated before the period of limitation for initiating statutory appeal.
2026 LLR 117
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principal employer not liable when the labour charges were paid and details of the contractors were supplied to the PF authority.
2026 LLR 82
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
100% damages not to be automatically imposed merely because the employer agreed to pay PF dues.
2026 LLR 98
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
No clubbing of establishments merely because the partner of one firm had joined the other.
2026 LLR 111
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Sale proceeds have to be first applied in satisfaction of PF dues and then secured debt.
2026 LLR 76
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Notice under section 7A, not in prescribed format and without EO report, is bad in law.
2026 LLR 87
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Tribunal cannot set aside a demand notice in a mechanical manner.
2026 LLR 102
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Coercive action to be stayed during appeal's pendency when presiding Officer's charge wasn't extended.
2026 LLR 110
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Employee's name and DoB cannot be changed after the last date for filing the higher pen-sion option.
2026 LLR 103
KERALA HIGH COURT
No criminal prosecution for non-payment of dues and non-cooperation when the person had no knowledge.
2026 LLR 93
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Damages and interest are to only be imposed after affording opportunity and assigning reasons.
2026 LLR 98
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
EPFO cannot directly initiate attachment of a clubbed entity without issuing them a separate notice.
2026 LLR 95
MADRAS HIGH COURT
The financial position of the company is to be considered while deciding the aspect of pre-deposit.
2026 LLR 82
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Penalty should be imposed on the EPFO when it prefers appeals belatedly.
2026 LLR 104
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Damage, penalty and interest are all inter linked based on the principal amount.
2026 LLR 108
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Units having their own machineries and independent functioning cannot be clubbed together.
2026 LLR 111
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Admission of guilt by employee is to be proven by the employer before the Court.
2026 LLR WEB 575
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Heart attack, while returning back from work after feeling unwell, would be said to have arisen out of and during the course of employment.
2026 LLR WEB 576
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Denial of permanency solely on basis of HIV positive status would be discriminatory.
2026 LLR WEB 577
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Excessive control/check on the activities of contract labour would prove that the contract is sham and camouflage.
2026 LLR WEB 578
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
A principal employer's general supervision over work performed on its premises does not, by itself, establish a master-servant relationship.
2026 LLR WEB 579
DELHI HIGH COURT
Clubbing of establishments, merely because of inter se supply of products, is improper.
2026 LLR WEB 580
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Industrial tribunals cannot order regularisation beyond the scope of reference or sanctioned posts.
2026 LLR WEB 581
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Burden to prove employer-employee relationship lies on workman asserting direct employment.
2026 LLR WEB 583
DELHI HIGH COURT
Absence of limitation does not revive stale industrial disputes raised after inordinate unexplained delay.
2026 LLR WEB 584
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Monetary compensation is equitable substitute for reinstatement of short-term daily-wage workers.
2026 LLR WEB 582
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Reinstatement is not automatic merely because no departmental enquiry was conducted.
2026 LLR WEB 585
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Burden to prove employer-employee relationship lies on workman asserting direct employment.
2026 LLR WEB 586
DELHI HIGH COURT
Dismissal for suppression of criminal case must satisfy proportionality, especially after honourable acquittal.
2026 LLR WEB 587
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
High Court cannot decide disputed facts under Article 226 in contract labour regularisation claims.
2026 LLR WEB 588
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Reinstatement is not automatic merely because no departmental enquiry was conducted.
2026 LLR WEB 589
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Even under beneficial legislation, claimant must prove accident arising out of employment with credible evidence.
2026 LLR WEB 590
DELHI HIGH COURT
Dismissal of employer's writ binds only employer; workman may seek enhanced relief independently.
2026 LLR WEB 591
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Back wages cannot be denied merely because workman undertook livelihood activities, such as agriculture, after termination.
2026 LLR WEB 592
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Heart attack constitutes an employment accident when work aggravates or accelerates the condition.
2026 LLR WEB 593
DELHI HIGH COURT
Section 25F violation makes retrenchment illegal, but reinstatement is discretionary, not automatic.
2026 LLR WEB 594
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Violation of Section 25F makes retrenchment illegal, but reinstatement is not an automatic consequence.
2026 LLR WEB 595
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Control over the work and manner in which it is conducted is an important test in determining employer-employee relationship.
2026 LLR WEB 596
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Contract labour engaged through contractors cannot claim regular pay scales of municipal employees.
2026 LLR WEB 597
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Reinstatement normally entails back wages unless reasons justify denial.
2026 LLR WEB 599
ORISSA HIGH COURT
Supervisory employees drawing wages above statutory limit are excluded from "workman" definition.
2026 LLR WEB 601
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Inordinate delay in raising dispute justifies substituting back wages with lump-sum compensation.
2026 LLR WEB 598
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Courts will not interfere with termination for fraud absent perversity or unfair labour practice.
2026 LLR WEB 600
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Illegal termination of casual workers may warrant compensation instead of reinstatement.
2026 LLR WEB 602
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
