Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Pratap Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jaspal Kaur Public School – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to labour court's order on claims (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments on res-judicata and retrenchment compliance (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. previous judgment compliance with section 25f (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. labour court's reliance on prior findings and res-judicata (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. compliance with section 25f affirmed (Para 12) |
| 6. dismissal of petitions (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through video conferencing.
2. The present petitions have been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 3rd May 2019, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rouse Avenue Court Complex, New Delhi, vide which, the applications filed by the Management for rejecting the claim of the Workmen have been allowed, and the claims of the workmen have been dismissed as not maintainable.
3. Ld. counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners have been non-suited on the ground of res-judicata. He submits that the Labour Court could not have considered the said plea of res-judicata at the initial stage. Ld. Counsel relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 4665
Claims of retrenched workmen are not maintainable if previously adjudicated and found compliant with statutory requirements, upholding the principle of res judicata.
The finding of compliance with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, in a previous judgment can be considered final and can bar subsequent claims based on res-judicata.
Claims of workmen regarding retrenchment procedure are dismissed as the issue of compliance with Section 25F(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act has attained finality and cannot be re-adjudicated in di....
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.
Failure to comply with mandatory provisions under S.25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act renders retrenchment invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Industrial Tribunal did not exceed the scope of the reference and considered all applicable statutes, including the Industrial Disputes (U....
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
