Back
HARSH BUNGER
Sugan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Bhartia Industries Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Harsh Bunger, J.
Petitioner (Sugan Lal) has filed the instant Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Award dated 23.10.2015 (Annexure P-20), passed by respondent No. 2-Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal below'), whereby the reference of industrial dispute regarding termination of services of the petitioner has been answered against him and his claim statement has been rejected.
2. Briefly, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute regarding termination of his services. In the claim statement, the petitioner pleaded that he was working with respondent No. 1-M/s Bhartia Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent-Management') as 'Store Attendant' since 04.02.1978 and was drawing monthly salary of Rs. 5,000/-. The petitioner claimed that in the middle of August, 2000, respondent- Management forced him to opt for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'VRS') and on his refusal to do so, respondent-Management got annoyed with him and issued an order on 04.09.2000 regarding his tr
The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226 does not allow re-evaluation of factual findings by lower tribunals unless there is an error of law apparent on the record.
The court affirmed that a transfer of service is a lawful exercise of management's discretion and does not constitute termination unless explicitly stated in the employment contract.
The burden of proof for continuous service of 240 days rests on the workman, and mere self-serving statements are insufficient to establish this claim.
The court upheld that the burden of proving continuous service and employee-employer relationship lies with the workman, which was not met, leading to dismissal of the claim based on delay and lack o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the contents of documents by primary evidence or secondary evidence under Sections 61 and 65 of the Evidence Act.
The management has the discretion to transfer employees without consent unless expressly prohibited in the employment contract, and non-compliance with transfer orders implies voluntary resignation.
The illegal refusal of employment by the management necessitated compensation for the workman, underscoring the employer's burden to prove any contrary claims.
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
