REPORTED JUDGMENTS AT A GLANCE October 2018
Forfeiture of gratuity is not automatic on dismissal from service. Supreme Court 1051
Exemption of a charitable hospital from Income Tax would not justify exemption from Bonus Act. Del. HC 1060
Civil Court is not empowered to grant reinstatement on illegal termination. Ker. HC 1115
Deposit of misappropriated money would not exonerate delinquent from punishment. All. HC 1081
Termination of hospital employees for creating reign of terror would be justified even without enquiries. Karn. HC 1106
Termination of a contractual employee is not to be construed as retrenchment. P&H HC 1077
Labour Court will determine only validity of punishment when enquiry is fair and proper. P&H HC 1101
Industrial dispute as raised is not to be adjudicated by the appropriate government. MP HC 1071
Revision/fixation of pay-scales is highly technical and tedious. Supreme Court 1055
Proved misconduct of moral turpitude needs no confirmation for denial of gratuity. Cal. HC 1086
Standard of proof, required under the Compensation Act is different than criminal trial. P&H HC 1090
Reinstatement of a workman guilty of misappropriation is not tenable. All. HC 1081
Non-rebuttal of evidence by employer would justify regularisation of contract workers. Supreme Court 1057
Industrial Adjudicator has to confine his award to the terms of reference. All. HC 1081
Notice of change under the ID Act is meant to workman giving chance to be heard. Supreme Court 1093
An order passed against a party without service of summons is not sustainable. Ori. HC 1098
No penalty for delayed payment of accident compensation justified when employer extended immediate relief. P&H HC 1105
Authority under the Minimum Wages Act would be a Civil Court. Ori. HC 1098
Plea of engagement of worker through contractor from 1964 not tenable since Contract Labour (R&A) Act was enacted in 1970. Bom. HC 1084
A 12-year belated industrial dispute would not be tenable. Jhar. HC 1079
Nature of duties of Police personnel is different from security personnel. Supreme Court 1055
Reinstatement with 50% back wages is appropriate on illegal termination. Bom. HC 1084
EMPLOYEES’ PROVIDENT FUNDS & MP ACT
Only in-charge controlling the establishment would be liable for penalty for violating Act and the Scheme. Ker. HC 1124
Mens rea and actus reus are determining factors for imposing damages for delayed deposit of EPF contribution. Bom. HC 1121
Installments can be allowed for payment of EPF arrears due to financial crunch. Ker. HC 1123
Refrigerator for storage of chilling of cold drinks etc. not ‘power’ for applicability of Act with aid of power. Ori. HC 1126
Show cause notice is to be replied with reasons instead of challenging in the High Court. Mad. HC 1125 & 1141
Coverage under the Act by clubbing two establishments run by father and son can’t be set aside. Raj. HC 1148
Tribunal is empowered to waive or reduce the amount to be deposited for admission of an appeal. P&H HC 1137
Damages for delayed deposit are not mechanical without considering its reason. Bom. HC 1121
EPF Authority cannot file Letter Patent Appeal against an order in High Court. Pat. HC 1129
Levy of damages/penalty not appropriate for delayed deposit of PF dues by a sick company. Bom. HC 1121
High Court not to entertain writ petition when EPFO show cause notice is challenged Mad. HC 1125 & 1141
Non-disclosure of status of the accused would result into dismissal of a complaint for prosecution. Ker. HC 1124
Coverage of establishment with less than 20 employees is not legal. Ori. HC 1126
Pre-deposit of 75% on appeal can be waived by EPF Tribunal due to poor financial condition of the appellant. P&H HC 1137
EPF Authority liable to refund money with interest if recovered without deciding applicability of the Act. P&H HC 1135
25% pre-deposit on admission of appeal is appropriate in view of pendency for 4 years. P&H HC 1137
EPF authority is empowered to conduct enquiry by providing reasonable opportunity to the parties. Mad. HC 1146
Only minor sons would get the EPF dues of a deceased member. Uttar. HC 1146
EPF Act not applicable upon employees covered by General Provident Fund or any other equally beneficial Scheme. P&H HC 1135
Writ Court not to interfere with an order passed by the subordinate courts/authorities unless a manifest error is pointed out.Bom. HC 1121
Cooperative society not to be covered if number of employee is less than 50. Ori. HC 1126
Courtesy Labour Law Reporter.
