judgement
Subject : - Industrial Disputes
In a significant ruling, the court has overturned a Labour Court's decision to reinstate a worker who was dismissed for alleged sexual harassment, and has remanded the case back to the Labour Court for a fresh inquiry.
The case involves a licensed contractor, the petitioner, who had entered into a contract with Cipla Limited, the third respondent, to supply depot workers. One of the workers, the second respondent, was accused of sexually harassing a female employee at the workplace.
The petitioner-employer argued that the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) had conducted a thorough inquiry into the sexual harassment allegations, and the worker was given a full opportunity to defend himself. The ICC found the worker guilty of misconduct, and the employer was obligated to take action within 60 days of the ICC's recommendation, which it did by dismissing the worker.
The worker, on the other hand, argued that the ICC inquiry was not conducted in accordance with the relevant service rules, and the employer did not produce any evidence to support the charges of misconduct. The worker claimed that the dismissal was unjust and improper.
The court found that the ICC report was not in dispute, and the worker was given a full opportunity to defend himself. The court held that when the ICC report was not disputed, there was no requirement to prove the report, as the admitted facts do not need to be proved.
The court also noted that if the Labour Court was of the opinion that a domestic inquiry was required, it could have given the employer an opportunity to conduct the inquiry or directed the parties to produce evidence regarding the misconduct before the Labour Court itself.
The court set aside the Labour Court's decision to reinstate the worker with full back wages and continuity of service. The court remanded the case back to the Labour Court, directing it to give the employer and the worker an opportunity to lead their respective evidence in support of and against the charge of sexual harassment. The Labour Court is expected to conclude the proceedings expeditiously, within a period of four months, and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law.
#LabourLaw #SexualHarassment #DisciplinaryProceedings
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Consolidated SCNs under Sections 73/74 CGST Act Permissible Across Multiple FYs: Karnataka HC
01 May 2026
Allahabad HC Stays NCLT Principal Bench Order Mandating Joint Scrutiny of Allahabad Bench Filings
01 May 2026
Bombay HC Grants Interim Protection from Arrest Despite Pending Anticipatory Bail in Lower Court Due to Accused's Marriage: Sections 351(2), 64(2)(m), 74 IPC
01 May 2026
Heavy Machinery Barred in Mining Leases Except Dredging: Uttarakhand HC Directs DM to Enforce Rule 29(17) of Minor Mineral Rules
01 May 2026
No Deemed Confirmation After Probation Without Written Order Under Model Standing Orders Clause 4A: Bombay High Court
01 May 2026
CJI Declares Sikkim India's First Paperless Judiciary
01 May 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.