Reported labour Judgments at a Glance – June 2018
Termination at end of probation is not punitive. Supreme Court 579
Dismissal justified for sexual harassment and assault on a lady officer. Pat. HC 595
Employees on contract basis are also entitled to maternity leave. Ker. HC 601
Summons for appearance in court only valid when served on the named person. All. HC 586
Termination of fixed-term employee, not retrenchment. P&H HC 622
Contractor’s employee controlled by principal employer, doing regular jobs to be regularised. Supreme Court 612
Failure to report for duty can be construed as abandonment of job. Del. HC 628
Regularisation can’t be denied to a workman when three others were regularized. Mad. HC 637
Death by drowning of Field Officer will be ‘accident’ for compensation though away from main office but within the premises. Ker. HC 604
Dismissal from service of an employee also causes financial death to family. Karn. HC 607
Irregularities in sanction of the loan by bank employee would justify dismissal. Del. HC 616
Industrial dispute untenable when raised after abnormal delay. P&H HC 622, Del. HC 618
No disciplinary action called for on termination of a contractual employee. P&H HC 622
Last drawn wages not payable to a reinstated workman when offered to be employed. Mad. HC 637
Compensation instead of reinstatement appropriate when not paid retrenchment compensation. P&H HC 623
No stipulation in Payment of Wages Act to deposit worker’s money in a particular bank. Ker. HC 625
Direction to pay bonus sans formula prescribed by Bonus Act is set aside. Guj. HC 650
Evidence Act is not applicable to the claim under Employees’ Compensation Act. Gau. HC 598
Abandonment is to be presumed on Inspector’s report stating workman himself is absenting. Del. HC 628
Canteen employees employed by Society but controlled by Port Trust will be latter’s employees. Supreme Court 612
Employees covered under EPF & ESI by the contractor will not be employees of principal employer. Del. HC 618
Employer can lead evidence in Labour Court when enquiry as held is vitiated. Karn. HC 607
Last drawn wages during pendency in the higher court to be at current rate of minimum wages. Mad. HC 637
Employees’ Provident Funds & MP Act
Pre-deposit not necessary on filing of appeal challenging damages. Del. HC 648
Writ petition maintainable for staying of recovery when Tribunal is not functioning. Ker.HC 658, Cal.HC 650
Levy of damages must have supporting reasons of explanation. Guj. HC 677
Opportunity must be given to employer before coverage of an establishment. All. HC 686
Failure to appear before EPF authority despite many opportunities, employer can be allowed to defend on payment of cost. P&H HC 688
No appeal lies before Tribunal against levy of interest. Ker. HC 695
Order of Tribunal supported with reasons not to be interfered by High Court. Del. HC 643
High Court not to entertain a writ petition against a notice by EPF authority. Del. HC 646
Failure to challenge the number of employees in report of Enforcement Officer can’t be questioned later on. Cal. HC 650
Levy of damages for delayed payment not justified without enquiry. Mad. HC 660
An appeal against the interlocutory order is not maintainable. Pat. HC 664
An order of damages and interest is appealable before Tribunal. Del. HC 648
Tribunal can impose conditions while granting stay of recovery. Karn. HC 669
Liability for EPF dues can’t be warded off merely due to indebtedness. Guj. HC 677
An employer has special knowledge of number of employees. Cal. HC 650
High Court can entertain a writ against show cause notice when not issued by competent authority. Mad HC 683
Instalments for EPF dues can be allowed to an employer facing financial crises. Ker. HC 657
EPF Authority not to demand contributions upon allowance till disposal of appeals in Supreme Court. Mad HC 683
Writ against EPF authority tenable only in absence of opportunity to the employer. Ori. HC 690
Appeal filed after 60+60 days is barred by limitation. Ori. HC 690
A pensioner can modify a nomination already made. Mad. HC 659
Having deposited the damages amount as levied, writ petition not tenable. Mad. HC 662
Courtesy: Labour Law Reporter.
