Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SACHIN DATTA
Precision Scientific And Testing Equipemnt Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Brahmanand Gautam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SACHIN DATTA, J.
CM APPl.94/2026 (Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 41/2026
3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing an award dated 14.11.2025 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi in L.I.R No. 112/2024.
4. The Labour Court adjudicated the reference made under Section 10 (1)(c) and 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as “the IDA ”) by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, New Delhi, in view of a complaint filed by the respondent/workman against the petitioner and directed the petitioner to pay a lumpsum compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- to respondent/workman on account of violation of Section 25F of the .
5. The petitioner in the present petition is a company which formerly manufactured testing machines and laboratory equipments. It is stated that the said company ceased its operations w.e.f. from 01.04.2023. The respondent/workman is stated to be a former employee of the petitioner.
6. The learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner submits that conclusion drawn upon in the impugned award is contrary to the evidence on record
The court reaffirmed that an employer must provide procedural documentation to validate termination; absence of such leads to findings of illegal termination under the Act.
Labour Law - Reinstatement in services – It is trite law that when termination is found to be illegal because of non-payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, particularly in cases of termination and retrenchment, and....
In illegal termination cases involving daily-wage workers, reinstatement is not automatic; compensation and circumstances of employment should be evaluated.
Once violation of Sections 25(F), (G) and (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act is established, reinstatement should follow, as per the decision in Gauri Shanker vs. State of Rajasthan.
Since litigious employer has gone back and forth from this Court before the Single Judge to the Division Bench and then Supreme Court and back on two occasions rendering the workman without the fruit....
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....
Labour Court has held against the workman on the basis that the documents like pay sleep, muster roll etc. are not produced. But, at this juncture, it is require to peruse the oral evidence of the wo....
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
