Back
K.S.MUDAGAL
VOKKALIGARA SANGHA – Appellant
Versus
P. RAJU – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.S. Mudagal, J.
1. W.P.Nos.35764/2009 and 12515 of 2013 are filed by the workman. W.P.No. 43643/2012 is filed by the management. For the purpose of convenience the parties will be referred to hereafter as 'workman' and 'management'.
2. The management is engaged in running various Educational Institutions. It also runs an Institution called 'Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences'. On 29/11/1984 the management appointed the workman as driver in that institution.
3. On 10/2/1990 when workman was driving the Ambulance van of the management, that met with an accident. In the accident he suffered injuries. The management filed complaint against the workman alleging that the accident occurred due to his irresponsibility, dereliction of duties and thereby caused huge damage to the vehicle and in turn to the institution. In the criminal prosecution, he was acquitted.
4. After the accident the workman was not assigned any work. The management claims he was kept under suspension with effect from 24/4/1990. The workman claimed that he was unjustly denied the work from 24/4/1990. The workman filed an application No. 35/1991 under sec. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('the
Section 33(C)(1) of I.D.Act deals with situation where money is due to a workman under a settlement or an award.
Section 33 (2) of I.D. Act reads as conditions of service, etc., to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of proceedings.
Section 33(C) of I.D Act is reproduced recovery of money due from an employer.
Rejection of an approval application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 deems that the order of discharge or dismissal had never been passed, entitling the employee to reinst....
If the Tribunal rejects the approval application filed by the employer, the right to file recovery application is available to the workman concerned who has been discharged or dismissed from the serv....
The workman can invoke Section 33A of the I.D. Act only if there is a pending industrial dispute between the parties.
The Management's transfer of workmen was ruled illegal due to violations of the Industrial Disputes Act during pending conciliation, affirming the Labour Court's authority to review such actions.
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
