IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for March 2017

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Over stay after prescribed period by the workman will not mean that his termination is retrenchment.
2017 LLR 334
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 A plea not taken before lower court cannot be taken before Writ Court.
2017 LLR 333
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Remaining away from work after resigning means it is to be accepted with immediate effect.
2017 LLR 331
DELHI HIGH COURT

 An enquiry will be vitiated if conducted without issuing a proper charge. and Enquiry officer can't decide on objections about his appointment. and Enquiry Officer cannot import his own knowledge in his finding. and Enquiry Officer must have to analyse the evidence in his findings. and Enquiry officer instead of proceeding ex-parte should have fixed next date if the workman boycotted the enquiry. and Enquiry Officer must act patiently on the principles of natural justice.
2017 LLR 322
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Reasons for delay in raising dispute have to be proved by workman.
2017 LLR 314
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Provident fund Act will apply even if establishment is not an 'industry'. and A workman under EPF & MP Act and Industrial Disputes Act are distinct. and NGO not entitled to automatic exemption for not applicability of the Act.
2017 LLR 304
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of Plant Operator for sleeping on duty should not be set aside. and Tribunal/Labour Court to interfere only when dismissal is mala fide.
2017 LLR 296
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Courts will not interfere in transfers unless mala fide.
2017 LLR 294
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Prosecution of other than the occupier of the factory would be illegal.
2017 LLR 293
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Prosecution for non-disclosure of violation of the provisions of Factories Act is untenable.
2017 LLR 291
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Installments can be allowed for payment of provident fund arrears.
2017 LLR 289
KERALA HIGH COURT

 A resignation is complete only after its acceptance by the employer. and Resignation can be withdrawn before acceptance by employer.
2017 LLR 282
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Reduction of assessed amount to 25% is justified when company is sick.
2017 LLR 278
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of bank employee for theft and forging of signatures is justified. and Departmental and Criminal proceedings can proceed simultaneously. and Acquittal is not a ground for setting aside the findings of enquiry.
2017 LLR 273
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 No appeal is tenable against rejection of review application.
2017 LLR 272
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement on wrongful termination is not a rule of thumb. and Compensation appropriate when post held by employee did not exist.
2017 LLR 270
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Extension after retirement is discretion of the employer.
2017 LLR 269
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Enquiry is imperative for termination of workman for misconduct. and Mere failure to reply show cause notice would not be abandonment of job.
2017 LLR 267
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Worker will be the employee of principal employer if he gets wages from him.
2017 LLR 265
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Enquiry will not be vitiated even if it was held by the legal adviser of the establishment.
2017 LLR 264
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Even when workman admits guilt, enquiry is imperative for sacking.
2017 LLR 262
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Allowances not to paid regularly to all employees to be excluded from contribution. and Writ against order of EPF Tribunal is maintainable only when it is perverse.
2017 LLR 260
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Order of EPF Tribunal granting interim operation is not to be interfered.
2017 LLR 259
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Charitable trust despite being exempted by Income Tax Act is covered under the EPF Act. and Trust providing food coupons at will be a 'hotel' for coverage.
2017 LLR 249
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Allowing unauthorised persons to travel in a school bus is a serious misconduct.
2017 LLR 244
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Withdrawal of resignation after its acceptance is not tenable.
2017 LLR 240
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Pigmy agents working exclusively for a bank will be its employees. and An employee engaged 'directly or indirectly' is to be covered by the Act.
2017 LLR 229
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Apprentices under the Apprentices Act are not to be covered. and Incentives are not 'wages' to attract contributions. and Payment of wages determines relationship of employer and employee.
2017 LLR 226
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Civil Court should not dismiss a suit merely that it is not tenable. and Civil suit is tenable when the authority fails to follow the procedure. Supreme Court
2017 LLR 225
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Abandonment of job by worker has to be proved by the management.
2007 LLR 263
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT