Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, J
Pushpa Kumari – Appellant
Versus
HFCL Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 01.11.2022, passed by learned Presiding Judge, Labour Court, Shimla, in application 80 of 2020, titled as Pushpa Kumari 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 service benefits.
2. Brief facts necessary of the adjudication of this writ petition are that two References were pending before the learned Labour Court, i.e. Reference No. 138 of 2019 and Reference No. 141 of 2019 when the petitioner was dismissed from service by the respondent on 17.07.2020 vide letter dated 14.07.2020. This was followed by filing of an application under Section 33(2)(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act by the Company before the learned Labour Court on 22.07.2020 seeking ratification of its
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 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 without evidence of loss of confidence, and reinstatement is the norm unless proven otherwise.
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....
Dismissal during pendency of industrial proceedings without Section 33(2)(b) approval renders it inoperative; workman deemed continuing in service with automatic reinstatement and adjusted back wages....
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
