Back
ANIL L. PANSARE
Vijay Krushnarao Pawar, C/o Lokmat Shramik Sanghatana – Appellant
Versus
Lokmat Media Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. The petitioners (7 journalists and 17 non- journalists), who were working on the establishment of the respondent were on 21-11-2013 dismissed from service without charge-sheet and enquiry. At the relevant time, the industrial disputes were pending between the parties before the Industrial Tribunal at Nagpur and, therefore, the respondent – employer moved application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act of 1947’). The respondent examined 118 witnesses to substantiate order of dismissal against petitioners (24 in numbers). The petitioners had examined themselves in support of their objection to grant approval for dismissal.
3. On 7-4-2017, the respondent moved an application for permission to withdraw the application filed by it under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947. The petitioners opposed the application. On 17-4-2017, the Industrial Tribunal permitted respondent to withdraw the application. This was followed by petitioners filing complaint under Section 33A of the Act of 1947, the Industrial Court granting reinstat
The court affirmed that dismissal without approval under Section 33(2)(b) is inoperative, and the employee is deemed to continue in service until approval is granted.
Non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 renders the dismissal order void and inoperative, and the employer is bound to treat the employee ....
Failure to seek approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act renders dismissal void and inoperative, as established by the Supreme Court in Jaipur Zila case.
Failure to seek approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act renders dismissal orders void ab initio, overriding subsequent interpretations from Smaller Benches.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the independence of the proceedings under Section 10, 10(4-A), and 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, and the inapplicability of the principl....
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....
Section 33 (2) of I.D. Act reads as conditions of service, etc., to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of proceedings.
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
