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)
