A settlement providing that during its operation the workers will not raise any demand involving financial burden is valid.
2011 LLR 584
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Deduction of wages of an employee will not be legal when no loss to employer is established.
2011 LLR 579
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Engaging 229 out of 441 workers as apprentices is not proper to deprive them from provident fund coverage.
2011 LLR 604
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reinstatement is not a rule of thumb on non-compliance of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
2011 LLR 631
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Appeal, not writ petition, maintainable against the order under section 7-A of Provident Fund Act.
2011 LLR 657
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Reinstatement should not have been granted to a fixed-term employee.
2011 LLR 637
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
No wages to workman who failed to join duty after revocation of suspension.
2011 LLR 577
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Termination of concerned workman during pendency of proceedings of a dispute is violative of section 33(1) of the I.D. Act.
2011 LLR 627
ORISSA HIGH COURT
Dispute of workman for falsely stating that no criminal prosecution was pending against him was rightly dismissed.
2011 LLR 619
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Prosecution under Factories Act for obstructing the Factory Inspector is misuse of the process of court.
2011 LLR 620
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Granting provisional reinstatement with 75% back-wages as interim relief by the Labour Court without adjudication is not proper.
2011 LLR 644
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
A settlement arrived otherwise than in the course of conciliation proceedings will bind only the parties to the settlement.
2011 LLR 659
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Nature of duties, not designation, of an employee is the criterion to determine whether an employee is a workman or not.
2011 LLR 662
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Explanation, not writ, will be appropriate to show cause notice from ESIC.
2011 LLR 573
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Death due to insecticide poisoning on duty will be an industrial accident.
2011 LLR 588
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Writ, instead of appeal, will be appropriate when two independent establishments are clubbed for applicability of Provident Fund Act.
2011 LLR 597
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Stay of enquiry not proper for its delayed initiation.
2011 LLR 614
DELHI HIGH COURT
Provident Fund Recovery Officers should wait for appeal period in recovery of dues against employers.
2011 LLR 602
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Exemption application rightly rejected by the Provident Fund Authority when records, as directed, not produced.
2011 LLR 624
PATNA HIGH COURT
Asking for refund after 15 years of the amount as paid to the workman will be cruel.
2011 LLR 629
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
The words ''riotous or disorderly'' mean that such acts must be tinged with violence, which causes a major disruption of the work.
2011 LLR 638
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Common part-time Accountant for two establishments is not a factor for clubbing for coverage under Provident Funds.
2011 LLR 591
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Overtime claim of the work under section 33-C (2) of the ID Act is rightly allowed.
2011 LLR 591
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interest to be paid on delayed payment of ESI contributions.
2011 LLR 650
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Object of Payment of Gratuity Act is to ensure that workman is rewarded for the honest service.
2011 LLR 638
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Settlement, during conciliation proceedings, will be binding not only the parties of settlement but the other persons also as stipulated in the ID Act.
2011 LLR 659
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Dismissal of a pharmacist proper when he was trying to steal drugs.
2011 LLR 611
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Asking for refund after 15 years of the amount as paid to the workman will be cruel.
2011 LLR 629
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
The words ''riotous or disorderly'' mean that such acts must be tinged with violence, which causes a major disruption of the work.
2011 LLR 638
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Common part-time Accountant for two establishments is not a factor for clubbing for coverage under Provident Funds.
2011 LLR 597
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Dismissal of a pharmacist proper when he was trying to steal drugs.
2011 LLR 611
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Overtime claim of the work under section 33-C (2) of the ID Act is rightly allowed.
2011 LLR 591
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interest to be paid on delayed payment of ESI contributions.
2011 LLR 650
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Object of Payment of Gratuity Act is to ensure that workman is rewarded for the honest service.
2011 LLR 638
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Settlement, during conciliation proceedings, will be binding not only the parties of settlement but the other persons also as stipulated in the ID Act.
2011 LLR 659
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Even if termination of a workman is illegal, reinstatement with back-wages is not automatic.
2011 LLR 654
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
When partners and employees are not common, clubbing of two establishments for coverage under Provident Fund Act not proper.
2011 LLR 597
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Forfeiture of gratuity rightly set aside when termination is not for prescribed misconduct.
2011 LLR 638
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Transport, washing, special allowances and incentives to all the employees'' are wages and to be accounted for provident fund contributions.
2011 LLR 568
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Summoning witnesses and requisitioning of documents in an enquiry without stating supporting reasons not justified.
2011 LLR 561
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Back-wages not proper if appellant-employer was not given an opportunity for hearing.
2011 LLR 613
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
In disciplinary proceedings, the Court cannot act as an appellate court.
2011 LLR 634
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Appeal, not writ petition, appropriate when aggrieved by coverage under ESI Act.
2011 LLR 573
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Compensation in lieu of reinstatement appropriate when the workman not paid retrenchment compensation.
2011 LLR 581
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
IIT is employer when exercising control and supervision upon hostel employees.
2011 LLR 591
MADRAS HIGH COURT
In matters of punishment after an enquiry, the Courts have restricted powers of interference.
2011 LLR 634
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
