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
Limiting Crop Damage Compensation to Specific Wild Animals Excluding Birds Violates Article 14: Bombay HC
28 Apr 2026
Appeal Limitation in 1991 Police Rules Yields to Uttarakhand Police Act 2007 on Inconsistency: Uttarakhand HC
28 Apr 2026
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
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
Belated Challenge by Non-Bidders to GeM Tender Conditions for School Sports Equipment Not Maintainable: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 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.