IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for June 2009

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 No increment for interregnum to reinstated workman without any attendant benefits and back-wages.
2009 LLR 561
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Direction for last drawn wages, during pendency of proceedings, to a reinstated workman is not proper by ignoring documentary evidence.
2009 LLR 563
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Allegation of wrongful termination without supporting evidence is to be rejected.
2009 LLR 564
DELHI HIGH COURT

 High Court cannot countenance picking of holes in the Award on trivial points and thereby frustrate the entire adjudication process.
2009 LLR 564
DELHI HIGH COURT

 1/3 rd back wages would be appropriate when the workmen have superannuated.
2009 LLR 568
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Last drawn wages to a reinstated workman will be payable when the employer has declined to allow him to resume duty.
2009 LLR 572
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Only in rare cases, appropriate government can examine dispute on merits to be referred.
2009 LLR 575
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Declining to refer dispute of contract workers of canteen that the contract system was sham and bogus is not justified
2009 LLR 575
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Government, while rejecting a dispute to be referred for adjudication should not decide that such persons were workmen.
2009 LLR 575
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 When a contract between the principal employer and the contractor was a sham, the contract workers could raise a dispute.
2009 LLR 575
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 When termination of service is not forming part of the writ, no cognizance can be taken.
2009 LLR 584
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Canteen workers through contractor in a factory, required to provide a canteen, will be workers of principal employer only for Factories Act.
2009 LLR 584
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Regularisation/absorption of the canteen workers, engaged through a contractor not within the purview of the Court.
2009 LLR 584
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Acceptance of resignation of employee plays a pivotal role for legal interpretation.
2009 LLR 588
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Non-acceptance of resignation merely on''administrative grounds'' is not sufficient. 
2009 LLR 588
DELHI HIGH COURT

 An employer can refuse to accept the resignation when disciplinary proceedings are pending against the employee.
2009 LLR 588
DELHI HIGH COURT

 High Court, in its writs jurisdiction, cannot compel an employer to accept the resignation. 
2009 LLR 588
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement with wages is rightly denied to a workman for remaining absent for more than eight months.
2009 LLR 593
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 High Court will not interfere in the preliminary decision making process for adjudication
2009 LLR 594
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Relationship of employer and employee between the company and driver will emerge with documentary proof.
2009 LLR 594
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of a workman for alteration in attendance register and sleeping while on duty is justified.
2009 LLR 597
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of workman for threatening the superior and sleeping on duty cannot be interfered. 
2009 LLR 597
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Alleging in writ petition that during enquiry the workman was not aware of taking assistance of his co-worker will be after-thought.
2009 LLR 597
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Labour Court is vested with wide powers u/s 11A of the I.D. Act to modify dismissal and discharge of a workman. 
2009 LLR 597
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Government should not decline to refer dispute on the plea that a sales representative is not a ''workman''.
2009 LLR 603
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 An employee is a workman or not is to be adjudicated and not to be decided by Labour Authorities.
2009 LLR 603
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 A medical representative can raise a dispute in the State where his termination was made or where he was appointed.
2009 LLR 605
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Government should not deny reference of a dispute even if the employee is not a ''workman''.
2009 LLR 605
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 Legal representatives of the widow should have been brought on record for compensation on the death of her husband.
2009 LLR 613
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Workmen''s Compensation Act is a beneficial legislation and its provisions should be interpreted liberally in favour of weaker section.
2009 LLR 613
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Insurance Court rightly accepted the petition of Milk Federation if it did not employ ten coverable employees.
2009 LLR 615
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Insurance Court cannot travel beyond the parameters in extending the ESI Act.
2009 LLR 615
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Persons not coming within the definition of ''employee'' cannot be taken for coverage of establishment under ESI Act.
2009 LLR 615
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Even a charitable hospital, will be an ''industry''.
2009 LLR 618
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Ex-parte award passed by the Labour Court is right when the employer failed to appear. 
2009 LLR 618
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal for forming Union and raising demand of other employees is not justified.
2009 LLR 618
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Compensation, in lieu of reinstatement, would be appropriate when enquiry was on technical ground.
2009 LLR 622
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 Full wages for suspension period will be payable when suspension not made by appropriate Authority.
2009 LLR 623
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Incentive bonus, LTA, washing allowance, leave encashment and ex-gratia can be made on reinstatement with back wages.
2009 LLR 624
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 On denial of quantum of dues not by the employer, the claim of workman totally unsustainable.
2009 LLR 624
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Picketing, gheraoing , staging demonstration by the workers engaged through the contractor, to be restrained by the Court.
2009 LLR 627
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Preventing an employee from wearing khadi uniform can''t be construed a misconduct
2009 LLR 629
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Employer can prescribe format but not the type of cloth of uniform.
2009 LLR 629
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Claim for gratuity rightly rejected when the claimant has worked only for three years
2009 LLR 631
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 High Court can''t direct that promotional post of Steno-typist be performed by a daily- wager.
2009 LLR 632
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Gratuity Act does not apply to government employees hence; the amount is to be refunded.
2009 LLR 633
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 A writ instead of appeal under Gratuity Act can be filed when there is clear illegality.
2009 LLR 633
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 An Award by Labour Court/Tribunal does not expire after one year.
2009 LLR 635
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Resignation, even on harassment, will not constitute a dispute under section 2 (k) or section 2A of the I.D. Act.
2009 LLR 636
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 A claim for compensation under Motor Vehicle Act will not be barred by section 53 of the ESI Act when the employee has received ESI benefits.
2009 LLR 641
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Validity of enquiry is rightly upheld when delinquent conductor failed to participate.
2009 LLR 643
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of bus conductor for misappropriation, after an enquiry, is not to be interfered.
2009 LLR 643
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Setting aside dismissal of a workman guilty of sexual harassment at workplace is grossly erroneous.
2009 LLR 645
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Transfer of an employee, for demanding wages for the interregnum, is malafide.
2009 LLR 648
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Dispute challenging mala fide transfer, can be raised under section 2A of I.D. Act.
2009 LLR 648
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Compensation, in lieu of reinstatement, is appropriate when the post was filled up.
2009 LLR 650
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 240 days working will be presumed when the Management could not rebut the workmen''s evidence.
2009 LLR 650
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Labour Court rightly upheld dismissal of the workman who has absented unauthorisedly.
2009 LLR 651
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Removal of bank employee for abandonment of service by absenting over 90 days is not valid without notice.
2009 LLR 654
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Reinstatement is appropriate when Management did not produce any proof of notice for resumption of duty by an absentee.
2009 LLR 654
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 A badli conductor is not entitled to the protection under the Industrial Disputes Act.
2009 LLR 659
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 It is unbelievable that 30 big soup-spoons can be hidden in a shoe by stealing.
2009 LLR 660
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Employers'' EPF contribution can be reduced to maximum ceiling when notice was given.
2009 LLR 662
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 A rule providing provident fund contribution in accordance with the Act will be legal.
2009 LLR 662
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement of contractor''s workers not proper when they challenged termination after receiving back wages and gratuity.
2009 LLR 666
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 A reference of dispute, made after 13 years of termination, should have been rejected by the Learned Single Judge.
2009 LLR 666
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement not proper by the Labour Court to the respondent who was engaged only as an apprentice.
2009 LLR 670
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Under S.33C(2) of the I.D. Act, the back wages of reinstated workman can be determined.
2009 LLR 672
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 Back-wages would be appropriate when employer did not rebut the workman''s contention about employment.
2009 LLR 673
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Transfer of a workman to a far off place, not being conversant with the language, is liable to be quashed.
2009 LLR 673
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 A sales representative, discharging duties of clerical nature, will be a ''workman''.
2009 LLR 673
MADRAS HIGH COURT