Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN
Rajbir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer (Industrial Disputes), Labour Court – Respondent
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. - Consideration in the present Letters Patent Appeal, which arises out of the order dated 20.12.2017 of the Learned Single Judge passed in CWP-6808-2015 titled Rajbir Singh v. Presiding officer & others, wherein the Labour Court's award dated 15.01.2015 was upheld and the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that in view of the provisions of Section 2 (oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the 'Act') since the appointment was contractual the dispensation of service would come within the terms of the appointment as per agreement (Annexure R-3/1). Challenge has also been raised to the order passed in review dated 07.08.2018 since on an earlier occasion, liberty had been granted when LPA-180-2018 was withdrawn on 09.05.2018 to approach the learned Single Judge.
2. Counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the orders below were not sustainable keeping in view the length of service and the fact that the appellant had been employed as Computer Operator on contractual basis in April, 2001 and had been posted with the Indian Red Cross Society, District Branch, Kurukshetra. The same had been taken over by the District Information &
Labour Court has therefore rightly come to the conclusion that there is breach of Section 25F of the Act. Such finding of fact has been rightly and succinctly considered by the learned Single Judge
The court ruled that an ad-hoc employee's termination does not require compliance with retrenchment provisions, and raising an industrial dispute after 16 years is impermissible due to res judicata.
Termination of a workman without following mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is invalid, necessitating reinstatement.
Decisions of Tribunals - Jurisdiction - While exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court is not to sit as Court of appeal over the decisions of Tribunals constitute....
Termination of services without compliance with Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act is illegal, especially when junior employees are retained.
Delay in raising an industrial dispute can bar the claim, and temporary employees have no right to regularization outside constitutional provisions.
It is settled law that for attracting applicability of Section 25-G of Act, workman is not required to prove that he had worked for a period of 240 days during 12 calendar months preceding terminatio....
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
