Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Jitender Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Jaspal Kaur Public School – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges related to retrenchment and prior proceedings (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. tribunal's decision on claims of appellants (Para 3) |
| 3. legal representation and contestation of compliance (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. finality and re-adjudication of issues (Para 7) |
| 5. dismissal of appeals and order conclusion (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. Vide the present appeals, the Appellants seek to challenge the Order dated 12.11.2021, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in a batch of writ petitions, being W.P.(C) No.9188/2019, W.P.(C) No.9191/2019, etc., whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed the aforementioned writ petitions and has affirmed the Order dated 03.05.2019, passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rouse Avenue Court Complex, New Delhi, by which the claims of the Appellants herein/workmen have been dismissed as not maintainable.
2. Facts of the case reveal that the Appellants were appointed to various posts by the Respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as `the school'). It is stated that the Appellants herein/workmen were retrenched by an Order dated 31.05.2016. The Orders of retrenchment were challenged by the Appellants herein/w
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....
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.
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.
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....
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....
Violation of provisions under Sections 25F and 25H of the ID Act led to the direction for reinstatement without backwages.
The main legal point established is that even temporary employees can be considered 'workmen' under the Industrial Disputes Act, and termination without complying with Section 25(F) may entitle the e....
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
