Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, J
Man Singh (deceased) through his Legal Representatives namely Smt. Dev Kanya and Ms. Ritika Thakur – Appellant
Versus
HFCL Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
CMP No. 310 of 2025
By way of this application, a prayer has been made to bring on record the legal representatives of sole petitioner namely Mr. Man Singh, who have stated to be died on 15.11.2024.
2. As there is no opposition to the application, the same is allowed, as prayed for. Legal representatives mentioned in paragraph No.2 of the application, are impleaded as petitioners No.1(a) & 1(b), in place of Mr. Man Singh. Application stands disposed of.
CWP No. 3162 of 2023
3. By way of this writ petition, the original petitioner, namely Mr. Man Singh, has challenged the award dated 01.11.2022, passed by learned Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla, in application 81 of 2020, titled as Man Singh vs. HFCL Limited, in terms whereof, though the complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act was allowed by the learned Labour Court but by erroneously holding that there was loss of confidence between the employer and the employee, learned Labour Court rather than ordering reinstatement of the petitioner, ordered payment of lump sum compensation of Rs. 5.6 Lac in lieu of reinstatement, back wages and other consequential servic
An employee's dismissal is invalid without evidence of loss of confidence, and reinstatement is the norm unless proven otherwise.
The court held that findings of loss of confidence must be substantiated by evidence; otherwise, reinstatement is warranted, and compensation awarded in lieu is unsustainable.
An employee's dismissal is invalid if not approved under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, entitling them to reinstatement and benefits.
The Labour Court can award compensation instead of reinstatement if the dismissal is disproportionate to the misconduct, considering the relationship between the employee and employer.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of services was illegal and unjustified, and the principles of 'last come, first go' were not followed. The court also emphasi....
Violation of mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act does not automatically lead to reinstatement with full back wages; the relief granted depends on the facts of individual cases.
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
