Back
C. V. KARTHIKEYAN
V. Mahalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Chief Engineer (Personnel) Tamil Nadu Generation and Corporation Limited, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent in Memo No.780/Adm- II/A.1/2011 dated 02.01.2012 insofar as the order deems the petitioner as fresh appointment against the order of the competent authority under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment Status to Workmen) Act 1981 dated 02.01.2001 as illegal and arbitrary and consequentially directing the 1st respondent to confer permanent status to the petitioner from the date of her joining in the service of the 3rd respondent entitling the service benefits of promotion, back wages, continuity of service, family pension benefits and all other concomitant service benefits eligible to the petitioner.)
1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records relating to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent / the Superintending Engineer, Purchase and Administration in Memo No. 780/Adm-II/A.1/2011 dated 02.01.2012 insofar as the order deems that the petitioner had been appointed afresh which was contrary to the earlier order of t
Workmen completing 480 days of service are entitled to permanent status under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments Act, regardless of subsequent classification as contract labourers.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981, a person who has worked continuously ....
Employees regularized under an Industrial Disputes Act 12(3) settlement cannot seek retrospective permanent status after an inordinate and unexplained delay, as such claims are considered stale and i....
Employees who have accepted regularization through a 12(3) settlement under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are precluded from subsequently raising belated claims for retrospective permanent statu....
An employee who accepts permanent status under a 12(3) settlement and fails to challenge the regularization for over a decade cannot subsequently raise a stale claim for retrospective permanent statu....
The Conferment of Permanent Status Act did not apply to the employees of the Board, and the Labour Court erred in granting retrospective regularisation without adjudication of disputed issues.
Employees who have accepted regularization under a settlement agreement cannot, after a significant lapse of time, claim retrospective permanent status anterior to the date of settlement as such clai....
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
