Back
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
Kerala State Beverages Corporation Staff Organisation (Intuc) – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala Represented By The Secretary To Government, General Administration (Sainik Welfare) Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Since Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
2. W.P.(C) No. 1002 of 2016 is filed by the Managing Director of Force India Management Services and Securities (hereinafter referred to as the 'security agency', unless otherwise specifically stated), a proprietary firm engaged in the supply of security personnel for Government and nongovernmental institutions. The Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'KSBC', for short) invited competitive tenders for deployment of security guards (unarmed) on contract basis for security duty at their FL-9 warehouses and head office and on being awarded the contract, the petitioner entered into Ext.P1 agreement. As per clause 9 of the agreement, the liability to pay the salary and other statutory dues of the security staff is on the security agency. Clause 22 provides that the period of Contract will be for three years with effect from 16.07.2012 with an annual escalation based on the maximum variable Dearness Allowance as per the Consumer Price Index.
3. Pursuant to the contract, the secu
Point of Law : Embargo under Section 33 (1) is with regard to change of conditions of service to prejudice of the workmen concerned in the dispute.
Conciliation proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act protect workers' rights against unilateral changes in their employment terms pending resolution.
The commencement of conciliation proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act triggers protections against altering conditions of employment during disputes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of employment of contract laborers and the determination of employer-employee relationship should be based on evidence and adjudica....
The court ruled that without establishing an employer-employee relationship, reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act is inappropriate; contracts are valid unless proven otherwise.
The court ruled that S.33(2) applies to all employers and workmen in an industrial dispute, regardless of the utility concern designation, insisting on clear compliance with statutory procedures for ....
Union lacks locus to challenge principal employer's termination of Board-allotted security guards due to absence of privity or employer-employee relationship; Board retains redeployment control; peti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Tripartite Settlement dated 23.07.2008 was binding on the workmen, and the court did not find grounds to interfere with the decision of th....
Workers can claim back wages if dismissed without statutory approval under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, as such dismissals are deemed void.
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
