Back
M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, SUKHVINDER KAUR
Punjab School Education Board – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. termination of service violated section 25f. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contentions on back wages in writ petition. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. modification of award regarding back wages. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments regarding back wages and equitable order. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court's consideration of reinstatement and arguments. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. precedents support limited back wages only. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. no infirmity in the learned single judge's order. (Para 20) |
| 8. appeal dismissed with costs. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, J.
This Letters Patent Appeal is filed challenging judgment dt.28.07.2017 in CWP-19956-2012.
2. Respondent No.2 was appointed as a Helper in the Punjab School Education Board (Appellant No.1) on 01.02.1996 on daily wages, but his services were terminated on 05.06.1998 in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
3. A reference was made by the State of Punjab under Section 10 (1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal, Gurdaspur as to whether his termination was legal and justified, and if it is not justified, then what were the benefits he should be granted.
4. An award was passed on
The punishment should be proportionate to the guilt, and reinstatement does not automatically warrant back wages.
Reinstatement is not automatic for procedural violations under the Industrial Disputes Act; monetary compensation may be granted instead.
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
