Unless perverse, the High Court will not interfere in findings of enquiry.
2017 LLR 904 DELHI HIGH COURT
Denial of reasonable opportunity is untenable when delinquent stopped participating in it. and Non-payment of suspension allowance not fatal to the enquiry.
2017 LLR 907 DELHI HIGH COURT
Self-serving affidavit is not conclusive proof of employer-employee relationship. and Employer-employee relationship not to exist in the absence of documentary proof. and Burden to prove employer-employee relationship lies on the workman.
2017 LLR 909 DELHI HIGH COURT
Denial of maternity benefits and termination is unfair labour practice. and Notice for claiming maternity benefit is only a procedural formality. and Dismissal of a workman employed for absence due to pregnancy, is illegal.
2017 LLR 912 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reinstatement is proper when the enquiry is declared void.
2017 LLR 915 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Dismissal of a union leader for assaulting Production Manager is justified. and No leniency to a workman assaulting the Senior Officer.
2017 LLR 917 MADRAS HIGH COURT
If a complainant is an enquiry officer, he would be a biased Enquiry Officer.
2017 LLR 920 KERALA HIGH COURT
Termination of contractual employee not illegal.
2017 LLR 925 GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Transfer is an incident of service when the job is transferable. and Family difficulties are no grounds to stall the transfer. and Chronic heart disease would not to prevent compliance of transfer.
2017 LLR 926 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Applying ESI on an establishment merely on the report of inspector not justified.
2017 LLR 927 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
No relief unless relationship of employer and employee is established.
2017 LLR 928 BOMBAY HIGH COURT
High Court not to interfere in the absence of any perversity in the enquiry.
2017 LLR 931 HYDERABAD HIGH COURT
An apprentice, not being workman, has no right for regularisation.
2017 LLR 937 GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Employees, who admitted working for contractor, cannot be treated employees of principal employer.
2017 LLR 940 CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Condonation of delay for appeal under Gratuity Act can be within additional 60 days.
2017 LLR 943 MADRAS HIGH COURT
Abandonment in the absence of letters calling workman to report duty not legal. and Reinstatement not feasible when the establishment is closed.
2017 LLR 945 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Govt. agencies to ensure compliance of required law by employers. and Prosecution of employer proper for non-payment of earned wages.
2017 LLR 947 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Fixed term employee can't seek regularisation.
2017 LLR 948 DELHI HIGH COURT
High Court not to interfere for change of enquiry officer without logical reasons. and Initiating enquiry long after issue of charge sheet not justified. and Suspension allowance payable when the service rules so provide.
2017 LLR 957 GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Provident fund dues to the employees to be treated as top priority.
2017 LLR 962 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
EPF Act is not applicable upon an establishment employing less than 20 employees.
2017 LLR 963 GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Under section 17-B of the Act, the liability is cast upon transferor and transferee. and Liability of transferee for EPF dues of transferor is limited to the value of assets transferred to it.
2017 LLR 965 KERALA HIGH COURT
An appeal of under sections 7-A of the E P F Act lies only against a final order.
2017 LLR 967 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
An employee will be entitled to the benefits of the Act irrespective of mode or source of payment of wages. and Once an appeal is decided on merit, it can be reopened only by way of review. and Persons engaged through contractor on part time would be entitled to the benefits of the Act.
2017 LLR 968 RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Tribunal is deemed Civil Court in terms of section 7-J (2) of the Act. and Words 'inherent powers of Court' and 'for ends of justice' are paramount and shall not be limited. and When there is no express provision empowering the Tribunal, it can exercise inherent powers under section 151 of CPC.
2017 LLR 973 MADRAS HIGH COURT
A settlement u/s 18 of the I.D. Act debars a workman for claiming provident fund.
2017 LLR 976 MADRAS HIGH COURT
If an order passed by the judicial authority is not clear, the same is liable to be set aside. and Remanding an order is proper when lower authority has not considered evidence.