Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
G.S.SANDHAWALIA, JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
State of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. oral termination without notice violates section 25-f. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. labour court orders prospective re-engagement despite delay objections. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. short service, delay, age argue against reinstatement. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. uphold violation finding; deny reinstatement for delay, conduct. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. daily wagers get compensation, not reinstatement after delay. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. pro-rata lump-sum compensation based on service length. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. quash reinstatement; award rs.2.25 lakhs compensation. (Para 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT :
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, J.
The challenge in the present appeal is against the judgment dated 21.10.2024 passed in CWP No.6463 of 2021, titled, State of H.P and another vs. Ramesh Kumar and another, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellants-State has been dismissed and the award dated 23.12.2019, passed by the Himachal Pradesh Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla, in Reference No. 46 of 2016, titled, Ramesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. & Ors. has been affirmed.
2. The respondent-workman, as per claim petition filed by him before the Labour Court, was engaged as a Beldar (part
Illegal termination of short-term daily wager violating Section 25-F ID Act warrants lump-sum compensation, not reinstatement, considering brief service, long delay, superannuation, and no unfair pra....
Labour Law - Reinstatement in services – It is trite law that when termination is found to be illegal because of non-payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under ....
Monetary compensation, not reinstatement, is appropriate for daily wage workers upon finding illegal terminations; reinstatement is not automatic even when procedural violations are confirmed.
In illegal termination cases involving daily-wage workers, reinstatement is not automatic; compensation and circumstances of employment should be evaluated.
Workman must prove 240 days continuous service preceding termination; no adverse inference against employer absent summoning documents or evidence; short-service daily wagers ineligible for reinstate....
The main legal point established is that in cases of illegal termination, the court may consider exceptional circumstances and order lump sum compensation instead of reinstatement, taking into accoun....
Since litigious employer has gone back and forth from this Court before the Single Judge to the Division Bench and then Supreme Court and back on two occasions rendering the workman without the fruit....
Rule 33 which prohibits an employee from taking employment elsewhere. Indeed, it was not even the pleaded case of the management that during the period of suspension, the appellant had left the Headq....
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
