Court Powers - Case Laws - 2011

Court will not re-assess the evidence and findings in the enquiry unless the findings are found perverse. Courts will however interfere with the enquiry if principles of natural justice or statutory regulations have been violated.
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur vs. Nemi Chand Nalwaya. 2011 LLR 634 (S.C.)

Courts should not grant relief beyond scope of prayers. When employer challenged the grant of back wages only and not the order of reinstatement, High Court erred in granting compensation in toto.
Ranbir Singh vs. Executive Engineer. 2011 LLR 612 (S.C.)

Interference on quantum of punishment would be permissible only in rare cases where punishment awarded appears to be unconscionable and actuated by malice.
State of U.P. & Ors. vs. J.P. Saraswat. LLN(2) 2011 P. 372 (S.C.)

Stay order of termination of a peon appointed on contract basis is illegal.
Mukhiya Karyapalak Adhikari, U.P. Khadi Tatha Gramodyog Board Karmit Anubhag, Lucknow & Anr. vs. Santosh Kumar. 2011 LLR 1235 (SC)

High Court not to interfere with the punishment, instead should have remanded back the matter to labour court if the punishment was disproportionate to the charges.
Management of Christ College Regd. Society vs. Kenchareddi. 2011 LLR 117 (S.C.)

Labour Court has no power to award interest on the amount due under section 33C(1) of the I.D. Act.
Durlabhbhai Naranbhai Parmar vs. Divisional Controller. 2011 LLR 649 (Guj. HC) ; 2011 FLR (129) 1065

Industrial Tribunal should not have declined the withdrawal of the petition of the employer seeking permission for dismissal of the workmen during pendency of the industrial dispute and, as such, the High Court allowed the petition for withdrawal of application by the Management subject to without prejudice to the rights of the concerned workmen.
Hema Chemicals Industries vs. Ramkailas Saroj. 2011 (II) LLN 216 (Guj. HC)

Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain the application for setting aside the exparte award if made before award becomes enforceable.
Greaves Cotton Limited vs. Government of N.C.T. of Delhi and Others. 2011 LLR 244 (Del. HC)

Ex-parte award of labour court having sound reasons will not be interfered by High Court.
Bhimani Khadi Gramodyog Sangh vs. Malshi Desar Maheshwari. 2011 (I) CLR 869 (Guj. HC)

High Court will not interfere with the Award passed by the Labour Court unless the conclusions drawn by the tribunal are perverse or not based on the evidence on record.
Dhoraji Municipality vs. Maganlal Jivrajbhai. 2011 (I) CLR 852 (Guj. HC)

After expiry of 30 days of publication of award, no application for setting aside the ex-parte award can be entertained by the Labour Court as he becomes functus officio.
Management of M/s General Industries Co. & Anr. vs. Satish Kumar. 2011 LLR 792 (Del. HC)

High Court can't sit like a court of appeal and re-evaluate the evidence to arrive at different conclusion in writ jurisdiction. Only perversity of the empugned order can be examined.
Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Limited through its Managing Director, Nainital vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court Haldwani, District Nainital & Ors. 2011 LLR 797 (Uttara. HC)

The power of Labour Court under section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act is so wide that a punishment of lesser magnitude can be imposed by it even while upholding the findings in the domestic enquiry.

Techno Electrics, Hyderabad vs. ChairmanCum-Presiding Officer, Hon'ble Addl. Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Addl. Labour Court, Hyderabad and Another. 2011 (130) FLR 183 (AP HC)

Labour court has powers to reduce the punishment when it is considered shockingly disproportionate to the charges levelled. But where the misconduct was about misbehaving with superior and absuing him, punishment of dismissal should not have been reduced.
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Kolar Division, Kolar vs. P. Selvaraj. 2011 LLR 934 (Karn. HC)

Interest rightly awarded on delayed payment of back-wages as granted by labour court at the time of reinstatement.
Manager, Naaz Cinema vs. Vasantben Rameshbhai Ghumadiya. 2011 (130) FLR 895 (Guj. HC)

Labour court while exercising equitable jurisdiction has powers to allow interest on delayed payment of due amount.
Manager, Naaz Cinema vs. Vasantben Rameshbhai Ghumadiya. 2011 LLR 1092 (Guj. HC)

Industrial Tribunal is not to confine its adjudication strictly to the matter as referred for adjudication since the incidental question can also be decided.
M/s. NHK Spring India Ltd., Malanpur, Bhind vs. NHK Shramik Sangh, Gwalior (M.P.) 2011 (130) FLR 768 (MP HC)

Tribunals adjudicating labour disputes should desist from trying some issues as preliminary ones.
Mahipal Singh vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-III & Ors. LLJ (III) 2011 P. 387 (Del. HC)

Dismissal of a workman, if not approved under sec. 33(2)(b) of the Act, becomes void abinitio and labour Court may allow a reference regarding such dismissal without considering it on merits.
Delhi Transport Corpn. vs. Prem Chand, ex sweeper. LLJ (III) 2011 P. 213 (Del. HC)

When witness shirked the responsibility in answering questions during cross examination, rejection of application by the court for summoning CMD of the company under MRTU & PULP Act in complaint for
unfair labour practice is right.
Vasudev Tanaji Narvekar vs. Larsen & Toubro Ltd., Mumbai & Anr. 2011 LLR 395 (Bom. HC)

Industrial tribunal is under no legal obligation to call witnesses of his own for cross examination.
M.P. Hasta Shilpa Hath Kargha Vikas Nigam Maryadit Headquarters, Bhopal vs. Om Prakash Kori and Others. 2011 LLR 347 (MP HC)

When the workman is not acquainted with labour laws, he should be given opportunity to call record of the management to prove his 240 days working.
Mahesh Kumar Sharma vs. Divisional Forest Officer, General Forest Division, Sheopur and Ors. 2011 LLR 349 (MP HC)

Under section 11-A of Industrial Disputes Act, interference with punishment can be only in cases of dismissal or discharge of workman.
Zonal Manager, Bank of India vs. General Secretary, Bank of India Staff Union. LLJ (I) 2011 P. 529 (Mad. HC)

Labour Court becomes functus officio after 30 days of notification / publication of the award in the gazette, thereby cease to have jurisdiction to set aside the award.
M/s. Ador Multiproducts Ltd. vs. Mr. N.B. Sagadevan. 2011 LLR 1166 (Karn. HC)

There is no complete bar under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC and proviso thereto, for seeking amendment to the pleadings even after commencement of the trial.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi vs. Workmen, Workers Working in Electrical Department of MCD. 2011 VII AD(Delhi) 531 (Del. HC)

Labour court is required to give adequate reasons while denying back wages on reinstatement when termination was found illegal.
Pramod Singh vs. Divisional Forest Officer and Others. 2011 LLR 1242 (MP HC)

Court not to interfere with the punishment of dismissal order when driver was found drunk and used filthy language and misbehaved with the passengers.
A. Chandrappa vs. Management of Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation. 2011 LLR 1277 (Karn. HC)

It is not open for the courts to substitute their subjective opinion in place of legitimate conclusion arrived at by the enquiry officer.

The Management of Sundram Fasteners Limited vs. The Presiding Officer, II Additional Labour Court, Chennai and Another. 2011 LLR 286 (Mad. HC)

In the absence of any party while proceeding ex-parte labour court has to answer the reference and simply can't pass a 'no dispute award'. Labour Court can't reject the application for restoration of the dispute.
Satendra Singh Gujar vs. Bank of India, Gwalior and Others. 2011 LLR 61 (MP HC)

When workman played fraud in seeking ex-parte award even after receiving full and final payment, court can set aside such award on application filed by the employer within 30 days of its knowledge.
Preetam Singh & Sons vs. Chotey Lal and Others. 2011 LLR 242 (Del. HC)

Labour Court has no jurisdiction to entertain industrial dispute of workmen and Co-operative Society.
Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd. vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and others. 2011 (129) FLR 85 (All. HC)

Labour Court, in a petition under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, cannot grant relief for the period beyond what it has been claimed by the workman.
M/s. National Woollen Mills and Another vs. Ramesh Chand. 2011 (129) FLR 912 (P & H HC)

Court directions to make workman permanent at the lower grade will be proper.
Mahavir Steel Industries (P) Limited, Pune vs. Pune Workers Union, Pune and another. 2011(130)FLR 1103 (Bom. HC)
Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites linkedin More