IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for August 2020

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 An experience certificate, by an unauthorized officer, does not create an employer-employee relationship.
2020 LLR 606
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 A workman is not a trainee when no training scheme existed.
2020 LLR 744
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal from service not disproportionate for repeated misappropriation of public money.
2020 LLR 704
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 An employer not obliged to reemploy any of its employees after retirement.
2020 LLR 612
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Punishment of dismissal for absenteeism is too harsh for an employee with 20 years.
2020 LLR 613
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Punishment of dismissal for absenteeism is too harsh for an employee with 20 years.
2020 LLR 725
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Dismissal not justified for misconduct unenumerated in the standing order.
2020 LLR 613
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal not justified for misconduct unenumerated in the standing order.
2020 LLR 600
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Amputation of one leg of a driver justifies 100% loss of earning capacity for accident compensation.
2020 LLR 593
GAUHATI HIGH COURT

 A transferred employee can submit his representation for mala fide after joining the transferred place.
2020 LLR 636
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Denial of opportunity for leading evidence by the management when enquiry vitiated would quash the reinstatement.
2020 LLR 629
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 586
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 597
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 682
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 674
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 600
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 734
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 725
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 An employer is under obligation to pay wages without any deduction in respect of the lockdown period.
2020 LLR 579
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Industrial dispute can't be raised by a workman who has not completed 240 working days in the preceding 12 months.
2020 LLR 682
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Industrial dispute can't be raised by a workman who has not completed 240 working days in the preceding 12 months.
2020 LLR 674
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Authority can direct an employer to pay differential amount of minimum wages along with 10 times compensation.
2020 LLR 657
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Merely the employee feels difficulty in climbing stairs is not sufficient to establish partial permanent disability for accident compensation.
2020 LLR 741
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Strike by employees in public utility services will be illegal when conciliation proceedings are pending.
2020 LLR 667
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Staying termination of services of an employee by the Industrial Tribunal is not appropriate.
2020 LLR 687
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Denial of back wages would amount to punish the workman and rewarding the employer.
2020 LLR 725
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Extending ESI clubbing of two establishments is justified when partners of both the firms are common, the place of work is in the same.
2020 LLR 659
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 No employer-employee relationship if the deceased cleaner was engaged on a truck, belonging to the third party.
2020 LLR 737
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Financial crisis is not sufficient to justify default in payment of wages on the part of the employer is not tenable.
2020 LLR 657
DELHI HIGH COURT

 When the Labour Court held the enquiry fair and proper altering punishment of termination from service, not proper.
2020 LLR 720
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Moral turpitude when not proved gratuity of an employee could not be forfeited.
2020 LLR 664
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Civil Court or High Court can restrain the strike in public utility services.
2020 LLR 667
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Any sympathy towards an employee guilty of misappropriation of public funds will be misplaced.
2020 LLR 704
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Where the employer wants to deny back wages, he has to plead and prove that workman was gainfully employed during the interregnum.
2020 LLR 725
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Labelling the employees as trainees depriving the privileges and benefits legally entitled would be Unfair Labour practice.
2020 LLR 744
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Proper enquiry justifies approval for dismissal of a workman.
2020 LLR 762
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Denial or forfeiture of gratuity in the absence of a specific order of termination coupled with an order of forfeiture of gratuity is unjustified.
2020 LLR 759
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Headmaster of the School or President of the Society can be prosecuted for non-compliance of ESI Act.
2020 LLR 722
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Compensation in lieu of reinstatement is justified to a daily ager worked for a short period.
2020 LLR 617
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Disciplinary Authority is empowered to reject the enquiry report.
2020 LLR 613
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Claimants to prove that the accident had a casual connection with the employment of the deceased.
2020 LLR 608
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement with back wages appropriate when the dismissal of workman quashed.
2020 LLR 600
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 A show-cause notice can't be challenged under writ jurisdiction.
2020 LLR 637
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Employer may afford a personal hearing to a transferred employee for his grievance.
2020 LLR 636
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 When an enquiry is held to be unfair, the Labour Court shall give an opportunity to the employer to leads supporting evidence.
2020 LLR 629
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate relief when the concerned workman was not paid retrenchment compensation.
2020 LLR 754
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Having worked for 11 years, can't be treated as a temporary employee.
2020 LLR 577
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 For compensation entitlement, the injured has to establish that he is unable to do all work that he was doing.
2020 LLR 741
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Going on strike by violating the provisions of law is a criminal offence.
2020 LLR 667
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Unauthorized absence could not be a ground for termination when leave was sanctioned by an employer.
2020 LLR 577
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Payment of full back wages is a rule when workman proves his unemployment.
2020 LLR 716
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Prosecution against the petitioner is liable to be quashed since the truck involved in the accident does not belong to him.
2020 LLR 737
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Strict proof of employer-employee relationship for claiming accident compensation is imperative.
2020 LLR 665
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 When the retrenchment is held illegal, denial of back wages would amount to indirectly punishing the employee and rewarding the employer.
2020 LLR 732
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Non-payment of ESI contributions by the employer is a criminal offence.
2020 LLR 722
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Gratuity payable to an employee is not liable to attachment in execution of any decree.
2020 LLR 759
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Educational, scientific research or training institutes are not exempted from the definition of 'industry'.
2020 LLR 761
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Mere heart attack does not raise a presumption of an 'accident' entitling the claimants for compensation.
2020 LLR 608
KERALA HIGH COURT

 No back wages if the workman has not made any effort for the searching job after his termination.
2020 LLR 600
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 ESI Act is applicable upon educational institutions.
2020 LLR 722
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Appointing any driver with prior approval of principal employer is not sufficient to establish an employer-employee relationship.
2020 LLR 642
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Writ petition is not maintainable until the statutory remedy is available.
2020 LLR 637
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Speedy justice is one of the fundamental rights of a person.
2020 LLR 619
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

 When workman was not allowed to punch-in his card establishes that he did not abandon his job on his own.
2020 LLR 654
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Discretionary power under section 11-A of the ID Act cannot be exercised mechanically.
2020 LLR 704
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Forum for challenging the order passed by the ESI Authority is the place from the order was passed.
2020 LLR 702
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement without back wages not proper when an enquiry is held to be proper.
2020 LLR 720
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Disaster Management Act is a self-contained code and no reliance can be placed on any other law.
2020 LLR 579
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 The principal employer is pay ESI contributions in respect of employees of a contractor working outside the premises.
2020 LLR 711
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Appeal Committee against the recommendations of the Internal Committee under POSH Act has to hear the parties.
2020 LLR 651
DELHI HIGH COURT

 No prohibition for termination of a workman during the pendency of an industrial dispute.
2020 LLR 687
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Appeal tenable against recovery of ESI dues.
2020 LLR 637
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 The claim of any benefit under section 33-C(2) which is not based on any statutory support or as pre-existing right, is not maintainable.
2020 LLR 596
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Unquantified amount payable by an employee under Public Premises (EUO) Act, 1971 can't be adjusted against gratuity.
2020 LLR 639
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Right to wages is a pre-existing flowing from the contract of employment.
2020 LLR 579
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 Deciding a preliminary issue will delay in disposal of the cases.
2020 LLR 619
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

 Non-rebutted by the employer about gainful employment would justify full back-wages to the workman.
2020 LLR 716
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 A long period in litigation due to lack of infrastructure is not justified to put the workman to suffer by denying him full back wages.
2020 LLR 716
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 A contract between the contractor and the principal employer cannot defeat the purpose of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936.
2020 LLR 712
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Principal employer has to ensure ESI contributions to be remitted contractor of its employees.
2020 LLR 711
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Power under section 11-A of ID Act modifying dismissal could be exercised exceptionally and not in a routine manner.
2020 LLR 720
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Allowing recovery of EPF dues, in installments considering pandemic situation/Covid-19, is justified.
2020 LLR 795
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 EPF Authority should avoid recovery process before the expiry of the limitation period for filing an appeal.
2020 LLR 796
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Employer liable to pay EPF contributions on back wages awarded by Industrial Adjudicator.
2020 LLR 777
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Special allowance or special incentive is not 'basic wages' if paid to only selective employees for performing any extra special work.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Basic wages means all emoluments which are earned by an employee while on duty or on leave with wages.
2020 LLR 777
KERALA HIGH COURT

 City and Industrial Development Corporation is not covered under the Act.
2020 LLR 790
Bombay High Court

 Writ petition filed within prescribed limitation for filing of the appeal, exclusion of time spent in writ proceedings would be proper.
2020 LLR 798
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 75% of the determined amount is to be deposited as a precondition for filing the appeal.
2020 LLR 773
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Quantum of damages for delayed deposit of EPF dues should be compensatory in nature.
2020 LLR 774
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Imposition of penalty for failure to perform the statutory obligation is at the discretion of the authority.
2020 LLR 774
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Levy of interest under section 7-Q of the Act cannot be assailed in the review petition.
2020 LLR 794
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 When the petitioner has agreed to deposit the amount determined, allowing review petition only against damages is proper.
2020 LLR 794
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 When an employer has remitted the partial sum of the recoverable EPF dues, taking any coercive action against an employer is not called for.
2020 LLR 797
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Exclusion of Writ jurisdiction by availing of an alternative remedy is of discretion and not compulsion.
2020 LLR 798
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Allowing recovery of EPF dues, in instalments considering financial hardship by an employer, is justified.
2020 LLR 799
KERALA HIGH COURT

 EPF members are to seek redressal of their grievance before the proper forum.
2020 LLR 796
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 An employee is also entitled to pensionary benefits on account of revision in his salary.
2020 LLR 784
KERALA HIGH COURT

 While reducing or waiving pre deposit appeal the Tribunal has to record reasons.
2020 LLR 781
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 No contribution on the cash value of any food concession, house rent allowance, commission, or any other variable earning or allowance.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 No appeal shall be entertained by Tribunal unless the employer has deposited 75% of the amount.
2020 LLR 781
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 EPF Authority has to decide grievance of the members, in respect of the release of their EPF dues expeditiously.
2020 LLR 796
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Payment made to those employees who avail the opportunity more than others would not be 'basic wages'.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Though dearness allowance is excluded from the term 'basic wages' but it finds inclusion in section 6 of the Act.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 EPF Appellate Tribunal is empowered to waive or reduce the amount to be deposited by recording reasons thereto.
2020 LLR 781
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 When the employer makes higher contribution such amount will flow into the pension fund.
2020 LLR 785
Tripura High Court

 Recovery before the expiry of the limitation period shall deprive the employer right of appeal.
2020 LLR 796
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Review against an order under S.7A is to be filed within 45 days from the order.
2020 LLR 773
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Employer has to deposit the EPF dues every month within the stipulated time.
2020 LLR 774
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Filing writ petition is not maintainable when the remedy of appeal, as provided, is available.
2020 LLR 798
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 The liquidator should make all efforts to get released EPF dues to the workers.
2020 LLR 800
DELHI HIGH COURT

 An appeal can be filed within a maximum period of limitation i.e. 60+60=120 days, before the Tribunal.
2020 LLR 802
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 When there is no intentional delay in remitting of EPF dues, damages may be reduced by Tribunal.
2020 LLR 774
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Emoluments, paid universally, necessarily and ordinarily across the board, falls under the term 'basic wages'.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Non-appearance despite service of notice, an employer cannot take advantage of his own wrong.
2020 LLR 802
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Overtime, leave encashment, bonus or an extra bonus for extra work are excluded from the term 'basic wages'.
2020 LLR 803
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Form-19 will be appropriate on the assurance that the same is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2020 LLR 800
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Bankers of a company having possession of certain securities are to sell off and transfer the funds to EPFO expeditiously.
2020 LLR 800
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Writ petition is not maintainable if impugned order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
2020 LLR 802
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Recovery of EPF dues may be allowed in installments considering facts in each case.
2020 LLR 795
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 If the employer is not willing to raise such limit for which there is no legal obligation, no recovery can be made by EPFO.
2020 LLR 785
Tripura High Court

 EPFO should release the EPF dues to the individual worker without waiting for the entire exercise to be completed by all workers.
2020 LLR 800
DELHI HIGH COURT