IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for August 2009

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Interest on accident compensation will accrue from the date of default.
2009 LLR 817
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 While determining loss of earning capacity, the concerned authority must record reasons.
2009 LLR 817
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Compensation Commissioner can grant higher compensation than claimed.
2009 LLR 817
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 100% earning loss for compensation is not proper when doctor assessed it only 15%.
2009 LLR 817
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Workmen''s Compensation Act, being a beneficial legislation, needs liberal interpretation.
2009 LLR 817
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Coverage of Turf Club under ESI Act under caption of "shop" requires reconsideration.
2009 LLR 826
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Non-payment of accident compensation would attract penalty to be paid by employer.
2009 LLR 835
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Burden lies upon workman to prove to have worked for 240 days in a year.
2009 LLR 837
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 ''Employer-employee'' relationship has to be proved by the workman.
2009 LLR 837
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 CT Scan Unit, medical store & pathology laboratory will be covered under Provident Funds Act.
2009 LLR 839
KERALA HIGH COURT

 For exclusion from the purview of EPF Act, a cooperative society has to satisfy less than 50 employees and no power.
2009 LLR 839
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Cooperative societies under Kerala Coopoerative Societies Act can''t get exemption u/s 16 (1) (C) of the EPF Act.
2009 LLR 839
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Allowing undetermined claim u/s 33C (2) of Industrial Disputes Act is an error.
2009 LLR 842
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act is in the nature of execution proceedings
2009 LLR 842
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Prosecution of employer, for delaying Provident Fund dues, will not to be quashed.
2009 LLR 846
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Theft of employer''s property is a serious misconduct when enumerated in the Certified Standing Orders also.
2009 LLR 848
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 High Courts/Tribunals don''t substitute the conclusions on penalty imposed by employer.
2009 LLR 848
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Labour Court erred in reinstating despite upholding enquiry for theft.
2009 LLR 848
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Non-submission of contribution to the ESI would attract penal provisions of the Act.
2009 LLR 852
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Employees working at places other than head office are to be covered under ESI Act.
2009 LLR 852
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 No liability for PF dues of earlier employer when new one has got premises in open sale.
2009 LLR 858
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Break in services due to absence will not deprive gratuity to workers.
2009 LLR 861
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Termination of a bus conductor for embezzlement of ticketmoney will not be interfered.
2009 LLR 865
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Termination of workmen, during pendency of general demand, will be illegal.
2009 LLR 867
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Object of Industrial Disputes Act is to promote amity and good relations between employer and workmen.
2009 LLR 867
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 When a provision has been made in an enactment, it has to be given effect and followed.
2009 LLR 867
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Conciliation proceedings are attempted to arrive at a harmonious settlement.
2009 LLR 867
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Compensation, in lieu of reinstatement to a daily-wager, has been rightly granted.
2009 LLR 871
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Termination of a workman, engaging intermittently on 89-days basis, would be illegal retrenchment.
2009 LLR 875
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Only Registrar of Trade Unions, not the Industrial Court , can grant registration.
2009 LLR 877
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Deemed permission for retrenchment, after expiry of 60 days, is misconstrued.
2009 LLR 878
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 In the absence of wilful disobedience of the court order; the contempt application is to be dismissed.
2009 LLR 878
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Awarding reinstatement to a workman who failed to prove to have worked for 240 days is unjustified.
2009 LLR 879
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 An ex-parte Award can be set aside within 30 days of its publication, thereafter the Tribunal becomes functus officio.
2009 LLR 882
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 High Court is empowered to set aside the ex-parte award.
2009 LLR 882
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Termination of Union ''s working president during pendency of proceedings, without prior permission, would be illegal.
2009 LLR 885
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Receipt of notice from Conciliation Officer will be construed as pendency of proceedings.
2009 LLR 885
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Interpretation of Industrial Disputes Act should advance its object; so that it serves the purpose.
2009 LLR 885
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 State government can delegate the powers of Labour Commissioner to a delegatee.
2009 LLR 894
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Compensation Commissioner erred in allowing amendment of the claim by non-application of mind.
2009 LLR 895
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Once an employer suspends an employee, subsistence allowancewill be payable.
2009 LLR 897
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Subsistence allowance is a nick name for "reduced wages" hence covered under Payment of Wages Act.
2009 LLR 897
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Even though the suspended worker does not work, yet he gets subsistence allowance.
2009 LLR 897
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 When an employee is suspended, his contract of service is not rescinded.
2009 LLR 897
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Suspension of an employee means prohibiting him from doing any work.
2009 LLR 897
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 On receipt of retrenchment compensation, worker''s demand of reinstatement is not sustainable.
2009 LLR 900
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 On retrenchment of a workman, the employer must offer retrenchment compensation.
2009 LLR 900
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Writ petition untenable when alternative remedy for challenging termination is provided.
2009 LLR 902
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Non-renewal of contract of employment, engaged for specified period, will not be a retrenchment.
2009 LLR 903
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 A probationer can be terminated at any time without assigning any reason.
2009 LLR 903
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 A probationer does not acquire any right to hold the post.
2009 LLR 903
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Plea of Insurer that policy does not cover labourers working on tractor trolley is rightly rejected.
2009 LLR 906
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Workers of hospital canteen are coverable under Provident Funds Act.
2009 LLR 910
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Appeal before the EPF Appellate Tribunal to be within 60 days.
2009 LLR 910
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Hospital even run by a Society but working with the aid of power would be covered by Provident Funds Act.
2009 LLR 912
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Detailed procedure is not necessary for imposing minor punishment.
2009 LLR 916
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Deprivation of promotion for 2 years not disproportionate to the misconduct.
2009 LLR 916
PATNA HIGH COURT

 On refusal of approval for dismissal when challenged, the workman will be paid last drawn wages.
2009 LLR 917
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 Habitual & unauthorised absence of a driver justifies his dismissal.
2009 LLR 921
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Relationship of employer and employee will not emerge in the absence of control by principal employer upon contract labour.
2009 LLR 923
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 When contract labour system is held as sham, the contract labour to be automatically absorbed.
2009 LLR 923
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Merely informing the contractor about regular attendance not to be construed as direct relationship of employer and employee.
2009 LLR 923
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Non-payment of arrears of pay, when the employee had not worked, needs no interference.
2009 LLR 936
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Awarding back-wages on reinstatement is not a rule.
2009 LLR 936
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Employer will decide whether acquitted employee deserves salary for intervening period.
2009 LLR 936
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 ''Continuity of service'', on reinstatement without back-wages, will be construed for calculation of retirement benefits.
2009 LLR 938
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Reinstated workman, if not allowed to join, will be entitled to last drawn wages.
2009 LLR 940
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Non-compliance of provisions of section 25 F of the I.D. Act will render the termination as illegal.
2009 LLR 940
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 Compensation is payable to the dependents of co-driver suffering injuries in an accident.
2009 LLR 942
MADRAS HIGH COURT