IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS for September 2010

IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS

 Denial of annual increments to the petitioner has to be by a speaking order.
2010 LLR 1000
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 No compensation when injuries to the deceased are not an accident in the course of employment.
2010 LLR 1001
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Remedy for non-payment of gratuity is by filing application for recovery and not writ petition.
2010 LLR 1004
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Compensation, in lieu of reinstatement, will be appropriate to a daily-rated chaukidar having worked for 2 years.
2010 LLR 1006
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Termination of services of the workman, without compensation, will be illegal.
2010 LLR 1008
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 For claiming overtime wages, the employees should satisfy that their wages are fixed by the Minimum Wages Act.
2010 LLR 1009
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement of a worker, who has neither replied charge-sheet nor participated in enquiry, is not proper.
2010 LLR 1013
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 A school employee in Delhi will not be deprived of remedy under ID Act.
2010 LLR 1015
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Payment of salary for the suspension period depends upon the final order.
2010 LLR 1016
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 The Industrial Adjudicator has to confine its jurisdiction to the terms as referred.
2010 LLR 1016
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Appropriate government for Cochin International Airport Limited will be State and not Central.
2010 LLR 1017
KERALA HIGH COURT

 Gratuity Act permits the employer to make it more beneficial.
2010 LLR 1017
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Retention of official accommodation by an employee will not deprive him to receive gratuity.
2010 LLR 1017
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Failure of the employer in not depositing the EDLI contribution justifies prosecution
2010 LLR 1018
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

 Rejection of reference by the appropriate government requires supporting reasons.
2010 LLR 1018
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Termination of an employee, obtaining job by producing false caste certificate not to be interfered.
2010 LLR 1018
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 Coverage under provident fund, on the basis of Inspection Report as signed but controverted by the owner, liable to be set aside.
2010 LLR 1019
DELHI HIGH COURT

 High Court has vast and unfettered powers to interfere when the findings of the Provident Fund Authority are perverse.
2010 LLR 1019
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Employees'' Insurance Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing petition.
2010 LLR 1020
ORISSA HIGH COURT

 High Court not to interfere in allowing interest on delayed payment of gratuity.
2010 LLR 1020
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Remedy for election about recognition of a trade union available in Civil Court.
2010 LLR 1021
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

 Conciliation Officer is not empowered to direct the appellant to invoke Labour Court under section 33C(2) of the I.D. Act.
2010 LLR 1022
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Labour Court erred in holding that a part-time workman has been engaged for contractual appointment.
2010 LLR 1023
KERALA HIGH COURT

 An appeal against the Employees'' Insurance Court not tenable when filed after 1010 days.
2010 LLR 1023
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Appeal pertaining to gratuity filed beyond 120 days rightly rejected by the Appellate Authority.
2010 LLR 1023
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Striking work in a hospital and assaulting senior officers will justify dismissal of the workman.
2010 LLR 897
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Denial of reinstatement to a driver, acquitted in the criminal case, is not proper.
2010 LLR 898
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 No last drawn wages when vitiating of enquiry is challenged in the High Court.
2010 LLR 900
DELHI HIGH COURT

 An employer delaying adjudication proceedings is liable to pay Rs.1 lakh towards cost.
2010 LLR 900
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Voluntary retirement of a bank employee rightly presumed when he absented for three months.
2010 LLR 903
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Tribunal erred in granting reinstatement to the bank employee, who is absenting and not responding to notice.
2010 LLR 903
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Banks perform multiple/diverse functions and the entire trade and commerce is dependent.
2010 LLR 903
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Scope of section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, providing for approval for dismissal, is very limited.
2010 LLR 909
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Industrial Tribunal is not empowered to review the decision of the Management.
2010 LLR 909
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Industrial Tribunal will not act as an Appellate Court in declining approval for dismissal of bus conductor when proper enquiry held.
2010 LLR 909
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of bus conductor collecting fare and not issuing tickets is not disproportionate.
2010 LLR 913
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 Discharge for continuous ill-health must be supported with sufficient evidence.
2010 LLR 919
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Denial of approval for dismissal for habitual absence is not proper when employer proved to have sent a cheque for one month wages.
2010 LLR 923
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 It is for employer to rebut when the employee places sufficient material of his being a workman.
2010 LLR 926
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Neither designation nor salary is the factor to decide whether an employee is a 'śworkman' or not.
2010 LLR 926
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Purpose of reference of a dispute is to keep industrial peace in an establishment.
2010 LLR 934
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Importance of a settlement for maintaining peace cannot be overlooked.
2010 LLR 934
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 When a person is authorized other than advocate, he can represent a party in Industrial Tribunal.
2010 LLR 936
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 When a workman did not give evidence of making attempt for finding the job, he will not be entitled to full wages.
2010 LLR 940
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 It is unbelievable that a workman will remain unemployed for 15 years
2010 LLR 940
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 High Court, having power of superintendence, does not act as a court of appeal.
2010 LLR 940
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 While issuing Notification under section 10 of CLRA Act, government's act is quasi legislative.
2010 LLR 949
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement of a casual Khalasi is liable to be set aside since he failed to prove 240 days of continuous working.
2010 LLR 953
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

 Last drawn wages, not determined by Labour Court, will be reconsidered.
2010 LLR 955
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 When the contractor's employees were supervised by principal employer, the contract will be deemed as sham, bogus and camouflage.
2010 LLR 957
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Various factors are there to determine as to whether an employee is a workman or not.
2010 LLR 957
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 HRA is wrongly granted when employer has provided accommodation.
2010 LLR 968
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Termination of a probationer not to be stigmatic when his performance was unsatisfactory.
2010 LLR 970
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT

 EPF Appellate Tribunal can condone the delay for an appeal even beyond 90 days.
2010 LLR 975
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

 Approval of termination not required if it is effected because of business re-organisation.
2010 LLR 976
MADRAS HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement will be appropriate to a retrenched workman if his juniors were retained.
2010 LLR 980
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Production of quality seeds will amount to manufacturing process under Factories Act.
2010 LLR 980
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Prior permission for retrenchment will be necessary for an industrial establishment manufacturing quality seeds.
2010 LLR 980
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Principle of 'ślast come, first go' will be followed while effecting retrenchment.
2010 LLR 980
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Penalty of 8 times the amount of difference for short wages liable to be quashed when the Authority had personal bias.
2010 LLR 987
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

 Tribunal will frame preliminary issues when a settlement is challenged.
2010 LLR 988
BOMBAY HIGH COURT

 Reinstatement not proper when the workman remained absent for three years.
2010 LLR 989
DELHI HIGH COURT

 Employer is not to make direct payment of revised wages to the contractor's workers.
2010 LLR 992
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

 When there is no infirmity in the enquiry, the Court not to interfere with punishment.
2010 LLR 993
PATNA HIGH COURT

 No prejudice can be presumed by delinquent when the enquiry report has been enclosed with notice.
2010 LLR 993
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Appeal, not writ petition, will lie against the order of Compensation Commissioner.
2010 LLR 995
PATNA HIGH COURT

 Dismissal of bus conductor, guilty of misappropriation, is rightly upheld.
2010 LLR 996
GUJARAT HIGH COURT

 High Court is not to interfere with the order of Insurance Court when the ESIC has failed to establish that the employer's record was not genuine.
2010 LLR 999
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT