SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND
Tata Steel Limited – Appellant
Versus
R. S. Singh S/o Shri Mohan Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I.A. No. 527 of 2020:
1. This interlocutory application has been filed for condoning the delay of 99 days, which has occurred in preferring this appeal.
2. No counter affidavit to the delay condonation application has been filed.
3. Heard the parties.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the statements made in this application, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in preferring this appeal within time.
5. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is allowed and the delay of 99 days in preferring this appeal, is hereby condoned.
6. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard at this stage for final disposal.
L.P.A. No. 42 of 2020:
7. The instant appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 03.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (L) No. 4314 of 2001, whereby and whereunder, while dismissing the writ petition the award dated 24.04.2001 passed in Reference Case No. 14 of 1997 has been refused to be interfered with.
8. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition which require to be enumerated herein, read as under:
Advanta India Limited vs. B.N. Shivanna and Another
Commissioner, Karnataka Housing Board vs. C. Muddaiah
Deepali Gundu Surwase vs. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D.ED.) and Others
Kusheshwar Prasad Singh vs. State of Bihar and Others
The employer bears the burden of proving that the worker was gainfully employed during the dispute period to deny back wages; failure to provide evidence supports the worker's claim to back wages.
The burden of proof of the employee's unemployment during the interregnum period lies with the employee, and the initial onus is on the employee to plead and prove that he was not gainfully employed.....
In cases of wrongful termination, reinstatement with back wages is the normal rule unless the employer proves the employee was gainfully employed during the termination period.
Workman - Order of Discharge or Dismissal - Section 11-A of the Act is reproduced as Where an industrial dispute relating to the discharge or dismissal of a workman has been referred to a Labour Cour....
workman has retired from the services and, therefore, whatever benefit is available to the workman, after her retirement, needs to be granted to her due to the order of reinstatement with continuity ....
Point of law; Suspension of service - workman herein also contributed the events led to his dismissal. Further it could be gathered that the workman herein remained out of service and contributed not....
The dominant nature of the employee's duties determines workman status, and the burden of proof lies with the employer to establish the grounds for termination. The grant of backwages in cases of ill....
Point of law : where there may have been delay in making a reference in terms of Sec. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, there could be appropriate moulding of relief.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.