IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for October 2014

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Workers of statutory canteen run by contractor would not become employees of principal employer.
2014 LLR 1009
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Removal of an employee for indiscipline is not tenable in absence of supporting documents.
2014 LLR 1026
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 On removal, principle of ''last come first go'' will not apply.
2014 LLR 1026
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Personal employee of Managing Director paid by company would cover establishment with 20 employees.
2014 LLR 1028
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Performing incidental work by a person would be deemed employee for coverage under Provident Fund Act.
2014 LLR 1028
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Allegation of workman having signed blank paper, when not proved, would be untenable.
2014 LLR 1032
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Burden of proof lies upon the party who pleads the facts.
2014 LLR 1032
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Provident Fund Commissioner can''t challenge one''s own order when set aside by EPF Appellate Tribunal.
2014 LLR 1035
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 An employee can''t be asked to furnish bank guarantee for receiving gratuity.
2014 LLR 1037
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Gratuity of an employee, on his retirement can''t, be forfeited.
2014 LLR 1037
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 After retirement of employee, employer will have no control over him.
2014 LLR 1037
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Misconduct would stand proved when employee has confessed misappropriation in the enquiry.
2014 LLR 1038
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Deduction of annual increment with cumulative effect not disproportionate punishment for misappropriation.
2014 LLR 1038
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Last drawn wages payable to reinstated workman when the employer has challenged the Award in higher court.
2014 LLR 1041
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Awarding reinstatement without supporting reasons not tenable. 
2014 LLR 1044
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Perversity in the Award would justify its setting aside.
2014 LLR 1044
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Additional documents can''t be produced without request.
2014 LLR 1044
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Demanding ESI contribution without verifying records is not tenable.
2014 LLR 1046
KERALA HIGH COURT

 ESI authority is bound to follow procedure under the Act.
2014 LLR 1046
KERALA HIGH COURT

 A teacher is also coverable under ESI Act when his salary is below the wage cap for coverage.
2014 LLR 1048
KERALA HIGH COURT

 ''Employee'' under ESI is different from a ''workman'' under ID Act.
2014 LLR 1048
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Beneficial interpretation should give preference in a social welfare legislation.
2014 LLR 1048
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement would be justified when enquiry is not proper.
2014 LLR 1053
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Abandonment of service will depend on intention of employee.
2014 LLR 1053
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Termination without second show-cause notice not legal.
2014 LLR 1053
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Abandonment for unauthorised absence is unsustainable without notice for resumption of duty to employee.
2014 LLR 1053
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Enquiry will be vitiated when violative of natural justice.
2014 LLR 1053
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Industrial dispute can be raised where employee worked on last day or at the location of the head quarters.
2014 LLR 1056
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Misuse of housing loan by bank employee would justify termination.
2014 LLR 1059
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Gratuity can be forfeited only on termination for any of the prescribed misconducts.
2014 LLR 1064
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Forfeiture of gratuity, without notice, will not be tenable.
2014 LLR 1064
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Prosecution of employer without affording explanation would be set aside.
2014 LLR 1065
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 An order issued by incompetent person will be set aside.
2014 LLR 1065
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Model Standing Orders apply till the employer sends standing orders for certification
2014 LLR 1065
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Non-consideration of relevant facts would vitiate findings.
2014 LLR 1065
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 An order, without application of mind, is untenable.
2014 LLR 1065
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Imposition of penalty upon a charitable society for violation of Minimum Wages Act not justified.
2014 LLR 1068
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Provident fund dispute on merit to be decided by appropriate authority, not by High Court.
2014 LLR 1073
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Termination for unauthorised absence, without enquiry, not justified.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Change in conditions of service without prescribed procedure will be illegal.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Limitation not to apply for raising an industrial dispute.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Workman can raise industrial dispute at any time.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Dismissal to be set aside if violative of natural justice
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Miscarriage of justice by lower court would justify interference by the Supreme Court.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Reinstatement with back-wages is justified when termination is bad in law.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Delay in raising an industrial dispute would not justify its rejection.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Enquiry for misconduct is imperative under Standing Orders.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Disciplinary proceeding to be initiated under Standing Orders and not under Haryana Civil Service.
2014 LLR 1075
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Unity of ownership, financial integrality of establishments would justify clubbing for coverage under Provident Fund Act.
2014 LLR 1088
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate when 18 years have passed.
2014 LLR 1092
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Termination of an employee who worked for more than 240 days without retrenchment compensation will be illegal.
2014 LLR 1092
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Removal from service for suppression of qualification not justified.
2014 LLR 1094
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Comparison between two cases with different facts not justified.
2014 LLR 1094
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 RPFC not the Assistant RPFC can resolve dispute whether an employee is covered under the Provident Fund Act.
2014 LLR 1098
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Part-time medical practitioner on contract basis is neither a ''workman'' under ID Act nor an ''employee'' under Provident Fund Act.
2014 LLR 1098
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 High Court not to interfere in absence of perversity of conclusion of Industrial Tribunal. 
2014 LLR 1101
DELHI HIGH COURT