Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
INDERJEET SINGH
Child Development Project Officer – Appellant
Versus
Lachcho Ram Meena – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
(Inderjeet Singh, J.)
Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners (hereinafter to be referred as "Department") challenging the award dated 19.06.2000 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bharatpur.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1- Workman raised an industrial dispute and after failure of the conciliation proceedings, the State Government made a reference to the learned Labour Court, Bharatpur for adjudication of the dispute. Thereafter, the Workman submitted a claim stating therein that he was appointed by the Department in the year 1989 and he has worked therein till 1992. Thereafter, the Department terminated his services without assigning any reason. The Department filed a reply to the claim petition and submitted therein that the Workman has never completed 240 days in one calendar year and he had left the job as per wish without informing the Department. Thereafter, the Workman as well as the Department submitted the oral and documentary evidence. The learned Labour Court after considering the evidence adduced by the parties come
Reinstatement is not automatic for procedural violations under the Industrial Disputes Act; monetary compensation may be granted instead.
The court established that reinstatement is the natural remedy for illegal termination, but monetary compensation may be appropriate for daily-wage workers under certain conditions.
Termination of daily wage workers under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act does not automatically entitle them to reinstatement; monetary compensation may be awarded instead.
Compensation in lieu of reinstatement is warranted where termination violates Section 25F, reflecting a judicial trend favoring monetary relief over automatic reinstatement, particularly for daily wa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that reinstatement without back-wages can be justified based on the violation of Section 25(G) & 25(H) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, suppor....
Reinstatement is not automatic for daily wage workers upon illegal termination; compensation can be awarded instead, reflecting the length of service.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of a daily-wage worker, if found illegal due to a procedural defect, does not automatically warrant reinstatement with back wa....
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
Listen Article