IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for April 2015

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Arbitrary retrenchment amounts to unfair labour practice.
2015 LLR 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Seniority list has to be displayed while effecting retrenchment by an employer.
2015 LLR 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Non-issuing of retrenchment notice and non-payment of compensation would justify reinstatement.
2015 LLR 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Before intending closure, the two months'' notice under section 25FFA of the ID Act is required.
2015 LLR 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Back-wages on reinstatement would be payable when termination is illegal.
2015 LLR 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Apex Court will exercise its extra-ordinary jurisdiction to avoid technicalities. 
2015 LLR 352
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Weaker section of society should be preferred for beneficial legislation.
2015 LLR 352
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Limitation Act not applicable for filing appeal under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
2015 LLR 356
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Non-speaking order for levying damages for late deposit of PF contributions would not be tenable.
2015 LLR 361
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement with back-wages would be appropriate relief when termination is illegal.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Industrial adjudicator is empowered to direct the employer to produce additional evidence.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 In disciplinary proceeding, a misconduct not to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Failure to lead evidence before Labour Court in support of charges would vitiate the enquiry.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Strict rules of evidence are not applicable in domestic enquiries.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Findings of facts will not be interfered by the High Court.
2015 LLR 367
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Termination without enquiry even for long unauthorized absence would be illegal.
2015 LLR 376
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Abandonment of employment by an employee cannot be presumed merely by his unauthorised absence.
2015 LLR 376
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Laws of drawn wages during pendency of proceeding in higher court not payable on closure of establishment.
2015 LLR 378
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Last drawn wages payable when an employer challenges reinstatement of workman in the higher court.
2015 LLR 378
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Home workers through contractors for rolling beedis would be covered by Provident Fund Scheme.
2015 LLR 382
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Appeal by employer before EPF Appellate Tribunal without impleading employees/union would not be tenable.
2015 LLR 387
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 A contractor can deposit EPF contributions in the code of principal employer.
2015 LLR 390
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Damages and penalty would be attracted for non-payment of provident fund contributions by employer.
2015 LLR 390
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 On delayed deposit of EPF contributions, penalty and damages would depend upon the circumstances but interest will be mandatory.
2015 LLR 390
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Prosecuting the employer for provident fund default after one year would be quashed.
2015 LLR 391
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 While holding proceeding under section 7A of the Provident Fund Act, the Enquiry Officer will function as a Court.
2015 LLR 395
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Objection about territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction is to be taken at earliest possible.
2015 LLR 395
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Mere admission of accident by a driver would not justify punishment.
2015 LLR 401
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Past record of an employee, even if it is unblemished, is not always relevant for imposing punishment.
2015 LLR 401
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Claim for money under section 33C(2) of ID Act lies only when it is based on existing right.
2015 LLR 403
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Confirmation of probationer not to be presumed even when annual increment is given.
2015 LLR 405
DELHI HIGH COURT

 No deemed confirmation is applicable for probationer in the absence of specific order.
2015 LLR 405
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Mere directions about ''continuity of service'' would not construe entitlement of back-wages on reinstatement.
2015 LLR 411
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Provident Fund Authorities not to initiate recovery until the limitation period for filing appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
2015 LLR 427
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Pendency of criminal case is no bar to continue with disciplinary enquiry.
2015 LLR 431
DELHI HIGH COURT

 No prejudice to be caused to delinquent when his past record is not disclosed in the order of punishment.
2015 LLR 431
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Domestic enquiry would not be affected due to acquittal of delinquent employee from Criminal Court.
2015 LLR 431
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Termination for misappropriation, after proving charges in enquiry, would be justified.
2015 LLR 437
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Gratuity can''t be forfeited in the absence of prescribed procedure.
2015 LLR 445
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT