Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI
Docking And Engineering Co (Visakhapatnam) Pvt Ltd., Represented By Its Director Moosa K. Mehdi, S/o. K.S. Mehdi – Appellant
Versus
K. Srinivasa Rao – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments on legality of the tribunal's award. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 2. court's affirmation of the tribunal's findings. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. final dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 19 , 20) |
ORDER :
B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI, J.
The Writ Petition is filed Under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the award dated 12.07.2019 under I.D.No.65/2015 on the file of Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam.
02. The contention of the petitioner’s company is that the respondents No.1 and 2 worked in their establishment upto 30.04.2014. The petitioner was in the activity of undertaking ship repairs. The respondents No.1 and 2 were engaged for the said purpose on daily basis. The petitioner is having workshop at Kakinada. There had been financial crisis from 2012 onwards. Therefore, the respondents No.1 and 2 services have been discontinued paying retrenchment benefits. They approached conciliation machinery. It was referred to Labour Court and Industrial Dispute, Visakhapatnam by the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Zone-II, Eluru, on the ground that the action of the management is illegal. The Industrial Tribunal-c
The Tribunal's findings on employment reinstatement were upheld as the petitioner failed to adhere to statutory retrenchment procedures in the Industrial Disputes Act.
The completion of 240 days of continuous service triggers the employer's obligation under Section 25(f) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The discretion to grant back wages lies with the Labour Court, ....
Statutory compliance under Sections 25(F) and 25(G) of the Industrial Disputes Act is crucial in retrenchment cases for legality, with repercussions for failure to adhere to these provisions.
Termination of employment found illegal due to lack of due process; procedural adherence under the Industrial Disputes Act is mandatory, leading to reinstatement or monetary compensation.
Reinstatement and back wages cannot be ordered for workers in a closed establishment, as such directions are legally unsustainable.
The appointing authority has discretion in imposing punishment, and courts should interfere only in rare and appropriate cases.
The appointing authority has discretion in imposing punishment, but the court may interfere if the punishment is disproportionate to the charges, and may modify the punishment or remit the case to th....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
