Back
GAURANG KANTH
Haryana Roadways – Appellant
Versus
Yunus Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT : .
Gaurang Kanth, J.
1. The present petition emanates from the award dated 07.05.2003 (“impugned award”) passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court I, Karkardooma courts, Delhi in I.D. No. 419/96 titled as “Sh.Yunus Khan and The Management of M/s Haryana Roadways”.
2. Vide the said impugned award, the learned Labour Court was pleased to hold that the services of Respondent/workman were terminated illegally and unjustifiably by the Petitioner/ Management in violation of Section 25-G and Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (“I.D. Act”). Accordingly, the learned Labour Court directed the Petitioner/Management to reinstate the Respondent/workman along with payment of back wages @ 25% of the last drawn wages and continuity in service.
3. The Petitioner/Management being aggrieved by the impugned award dated 07.05.2003, has preferred the present petition under the Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia praying for quashing of the impugned award.
FACTS RELEVANT FOR THE ADJUDICATION OF THE PRESENT WRIT
4. It is the case of the Respondent/workman that he was appointed by the Petitioner/Management as a Helper w.e.f. 03.05.1985. The Respondent/workman continu
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the definition of 'retrenchment' under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act in determining the....
Non-renewal of contract does not amount to retrenchment under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the I.D. Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Petitioner failed to prove that the termination was in violation of Section 25-H of the I.D. Act.
Point of law :Labour Law - There is no proof that the workman has worked for 240 days and, therefore, it was held by the Labour Court that there is no proof that the workman was working continuously ....
Violation of provisions under Sections 25F and 25H of the ID Act led to the direction for reinstatement without backwages.
It is settled law that for attracting applicability of Section 25-G of Act, workman is not required to prove that he had worked for a period of 240 days during 12 calendar months preceding terminatio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the employer must follow the relevant provisions of the I.D. Act before terminating the service of an employee, and failure to do so may entit....
Termination of a workman on a contractual basis may not constitute retrenchment if the employment is of a permanent nature, and unfair labor practices may warrant compensation instead of reinstatemen....
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
