Interest will be payable for delay in payment of awarded amount.
2017 LLR 785 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Contractor's workers will be entitled to same wages as regular employees.
2017 LLR 785 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Deposit of renewal fee to justify holding of valid driving licence.
2017 LLR 787 DELHI HIGH COURT
Employer-employee relationship proved when averment of employee is not rebutted. and Evidence Act not applicable to Employees Compensation Act.
2017 LLR 789 DELHI HIGH COURT
Clean service record will mitigate punishment of bank employee for disproportionate assets.
2017 LLR 792 DELHI HIGH COURT
Compensation for accident only when it occurred during employment. and Legal notice can't improve the deficiencies in FIR for claiming accident compensation.
2017 LLR 793 DELHI HIGH COURT
Compensation is appropriate when employment was for short duration.
2017 LLR 796 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Government can't delve on merits of a dispute to refer for adjudication.
2017 LLR 798 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
ESI Act applicable even when an establishment is covered by BO&CW Act.
2017 LLR 799 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Gratuity can't be withheld on non-vacating of employer's accommodation.
2017 LLR 803 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Excess working hours to be compensated by overtime.
2017 LLR 806 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Fixed term employee can't be reinstated.
2017 LLR 808 MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Termination for unauthorised absence too harsh.
2017 LLR 811 GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Daily allowance forms part of wages for calculating accident compensation. and Notice for accident compensation is mandatory.
2017 LLR 813 GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Misrepresentation for obtaining job amounts to moral turpitude.
2017 LLR 816 ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Notice is imperative for the termination of employment.
2017 LLR 827 HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
On approval application, adjudicator to confine about compliance of condition u/s of 33 of the ID Act.
2017 LLR 831 GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Greed of dishonest bus conductor is to cost his job.
2017 LLR 840 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Insured employees are entitled to medical benefits from ESIC.
2017 LLR 842 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Dismissal justified when job obtained on forged education certificate.
2017 LLR 844 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Settlement u/s 18(3)(b) of the ID Act will be binding on all employees.
2017 LLR 846 MADRAS HIGH COURT
Union leader has no impunity from his transfer.
2017 LLR 849 MADRAS HIGH COURT
Coverage of an establishment under ESI merely on inspector report not tenable.
2017 LLR 854 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Contractor's employees also to be covered under ESI.
2017 LLR 855 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Civil Courts should stay away from claim for gratuity
2017 LLR 861 MADRAS HIGH COURT
Exercise of the option under Pension Scheme, would not foreclose the exercise of further option. and Proviso to clause of pension scheme permits an option to employer and employee from contribution beyond salary ceiling.
2017 LLR 866 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Appeal beyond expiry of prescribed period would not debar when no notice was served upon the appellant.
2017 LLR 868 RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Writ petition filed after 5 years challenging the order of Appellate Tribunal will not be dismissed when delay is justified.
2017 LLR 870 PATNA HIGH COURT
Without supporting evidence of financial loss, levy of damages not to be reduced in appeal.
2017 LLR 871 DELHI HIGH COURT
Frequency of number of defaults is relevant for reducing the damages for delayed deposit of contributions. and No limitation for initiating action for recovery of damages for delayed payment.
2017 LLR 875 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
An apprentice under Apprentices Act not to be covered under the EPF Act. and EPF authority empowered to enforce attendance of any person. and The EPF & MP Act are not empowered to direct employer for compliance of Bonus, Apprentices or Minimum Wages Acts.and A trainee under standing orders not 'employee' to be covered under the Act. and While holding proceedings under section 7A the EPF authority is vested with the powers of the Civil Court. and Identification of beneficiaries is imperative for determination of liability of an employer. and Authority must determine actual concrete difference in payment of contribution.