‘Medical Representative not a workman’: Delhi HC upholds Labour Court order
“The petitioner was not a person doing clerical or menial jobs but was a qualified graduate who had received specialized training in his field of work.”
workman
Who is a “Workman”? Supreme Court clarifies the definition in Industrial Disputes context
Supreme Court noted that as per the employee in the case at hand, comes within the meaning of “workman” as given in Section 2(s) of the I.D. Act and the management without following the legal procedure, relieved him from service abruptly and hence, the same is illegal termination.
Bombay High Court upholds Cadbury’s termination decision for not being ‘employee’ under MRTU and PULP Act
Both Labour as well as Industrial Court have concurrently held that apart from performing supervisory nature of duties, the petitioner did not himself perform any manual, skilled, unskilled or clerical work.
Nature of duties and functions is the determining factor in ascertaining ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act; Bombay HC reiterates
The High Court stated that dominant purpose of the employee should be considered, instead of any additional duties performed.
‘Hospital deemed an ‘Industry’ under Industrial Disputes Act’; Delhi High Court affirms Rights of a ‘Workman’ in Hospital Dispute
Delhi High Court upholds Labour Court’s finding, affirming Hospital as an Industry under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 validating State Government’s referral authority, and confirming the continuous service of the workman.
Special Rules like Standing Orders override general CCA Rules, 1965: Supreme Court reiterates
Supreme Court clarified that Standing Orders cover wider activities of workmen and were workmen specific, yet, in view of Section 13B of 1946 Act, a specific notification can be made applying CCA Rules 1965 to that specific aspect, but a notification was necessary.
Workman’s absence from work due to ill health, though unauthorized but not willful or by negligence; Telangana High Court sets aside order of removal
“The respondents were directed to count the service of the workman from the date of removal till his death with all attendant benefits payable to the petitioner but without back wages.”
Temporary, seasonal or short-term employment does not amount to unfair labour practice; Allahabad High Court denies relief to workman
Allahabad High Court said that it is not possible to hold that temporary employment for every seasonal increase in industrial activities as an unfair labour practice.
Delhi High Court enhances compensation from Rs 50,000 to Rs. 1,50,000 for illegal termination of ‘workman’
Delhi High Court observed that Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. R. Rajappa, 1978 (3) SCR 207 acts as a North star for the courts to reach the conclusion regarding the applicability of the Industrial Dispute Act to an organization by laying down elaborate guidelines with respect to the definition of ‘industry’ under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Dispute Act.
Labour Disputes| Workman’s permanent address must be mentioned, even if he/she is represented by Union: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that effective relief can be granted to a worker only if the permanent address of the workman is furnished in the pleadings.
Whether the workwoman employed in Beedi manufacturing process is covered under the purview of Employees’ Compensation Act? Telangana High Court answers
Telangana High Court: M Laxman, J. allowed the appeal and remanded the matter for adjudication on merits and held that
[ID Act] Kar HC | Labour Court has no jurisdiction to first decide the workmen’s entitlement and then proceed to compute the benefit so adjudicated; Labour Court’s power like that of the Executing Court’s power
Karnataka High Court: K.S. Mudagal, J., allowed the petition and set aside the impugned award awarding compensation as well as the silver
Customer produced to prove the guilt of misconduct by Conductor of DTC Bus: Is it correct? Del HC answers while reiterating established position of law
Delhi High Court: Prathiba M. Singh, J., while examining a case which was dismissed 30 years ago with regard to a workman’s
If Labour Court orders reinstatement and employer challenges the said order, is workman entitled to payment of full wages during pendency of challenge by employer? Del HC explains in consonance of Industrial Disputes Act
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench of Rajiv Shakdher and Talwant Singh, JJ., decided a matter with regard to payment of full
All HC | Can workman who was employed for particular project be considered employee of the company and given permanent status after project is over? Court answers
Allahabad High Court: Siddhartha Verma, J. reiterated the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Lal Mohammad v. Indian Railway Construction
Failure to make an enquiry before dismissal or discharge of a workman can be justified by leading evidence before the Labour Court: SC clarifies
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Navin Sinha and Indu Malhotra* has set aside the impugned judgment of Uttaranchal
Jhar HC | No discrimination to be made if the nature of job is same and performance are same or similar, Principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ applied
Jharkhand High Court: S. N Pathak J., upheld the award applying the principle of equal pay for equal work. The facts of
SL SC | S. 31 B (5) of Industrial Disputes Act does not debar from maintaining application to Labour Tribunal against termination of services and to file fundamental rights application to SC simultaneously
Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Full Bench of Jayantha Jayasuriya, CJ and Murdu N.B. Fernando and
SL SC | Preliminary objection overruled, no provision requiring the filing of objections in an appeal; Court allows appeal
Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Full Bench of Priyantha Jayawardena, PC, Murdu N.B. Fernando, PC, and
Patna HC | Referring authority for industrial dispute cannot assume role of quasi-judicial body while conducting conciliation proceeding
Patna High Court: Shivaji Pandey, J. allowed the writ application to the extent that the impugned order was remanded back to the