Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Managing Director, H.P. Financial Corporation, Shimla – Appellant
Versus
Anil Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the award dated 15.03.2016, passed by learned Labour Court-cum- Industrial Tribunal, Shimla, in terms whereof, the Reference made by the appropriate Government to the learned Labour Court was answered as under:-
“As a sequel to my above discussion and findings on issues No. 1 to 3, the claim of the petitioner succeeds and is hereby partly allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be reinstated in service forthwith with seniority and continuity. However the petitioner is not entitled to back wages and as such the reference is ordered to be answered in favour of the petitionerand against the respondent. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate government for publication in official gazette. File, after completion, be consigned to records.”
2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this writ petition are that the respondent/workman, raised an industrial dispute that he was engaged as a Chowkidar by the petitioner- Corporation for watch and ward at M/s S.L. Industries, Village Kandisar on 28.02.2006 and his services were terminated on 02.11.2006, without following the procedure provide
Termination of services without following due process under the Industrial Disputes Act is illegal, and reinstatement with seniority is warranted.
Termination of services without compliance with Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act is illegal, especially when junior employees are retained.
The Labour Court's award was quashed due to insufficient evidence supporting the claimant's continuous service and failure to timely raise disputes, violating the Industrial Disputes Act.
The court found that the termination of the petitioner was unlawful due to the retention of junior employees, violating the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of compliance with the Industrial Disputes Act in cases of termination, highlighting the distinction between different types of appointments and the need for ev....
Termination of employment without notice under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act is illegal if the employee has completed more than 240 days of service.
The completion of 240 days of continuous service triggers the employer's obligation under Section 25(f) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The discretion to grant back wages lies with the Labour Court, ....
The burden of proof lies with the claimant to demonstrate continuous employment and unjustified breaks; failure to do so results in dismissal of claims under the Industrial Disputes Act.
The court emphasized the power of the Labour Court to set aside termination and grant relief, and the employer's obligation to reinstate the employees.
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
