9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1) Termination of services justified? 2) Maintainability of the reference? 3) Workman's definition under the Industrial Act? 4) Entitlement to back wages? Analysis: *Issue 1: Termination of services justified?* The workman alleged wrongful termination without notice, charge-sheet, or inquiry after 12 years of service. The Labour Court found a master-servant relationship at the time of termination, ruling in favor of the workman. The High Court upheld this decision, leading to the appellant's liability for reinstatement and back wages. *Issue 2: Maintainability of the reference?* The appellant raised objections on the workman's supervisory role and workman status under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court and High Court rejected these objections, deeming the reference valid, allowing adjudication on the termination issue. *Issue 3: Workman's definition under the Industrial Act?* The Labour Court dismissed the appellant's claim that the workman did not fit the Act's definition. The High Court concurred, maintaining the workman's status and right to dispute resolution. *Issue 4: Entitlement to back wages?* The Labour Court awarded 25% back wages based on precedent, limiting it to the time of termination until reinstatement. The High Court, however, granted full back wages, holding the appellant liable for the entire period of unemployment. The appellant argued for the evidence of gainful employment post-termination, but the High Court's decision stood, emphasizing the workman's right to full back wages. In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the High Court's decision on reinstatement and full back wages. The Court rejected the appellant's arguments on voluntary termination and gainful employment post-termination, upholding the workman's entitlement to complete back wages.
|
