9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to order upholding termination, interpretation of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Termination Challenge: - Respondent terminated from service, claimed violation of Section 25G of the Act. - Dispute referred to Labour Court regarding the validity of termination. - Appellant argued Law department not an industry. - Labour Court and High Court upheld termination, considering Law department as an industry. - Division Bench affirmed Labour Court's view based on Section 2(s) of the Act. - Appellant contended Law department not an industry, pending larger Bench consideration. - Courts failed to justify Law department as an industry, citing precedents and principles. - Emphasized importance of analyzing decisions and isolating ratio decidendi. - Stressed that judgments are not statutes and must be interpreted in context. - Precedents should guide justice path, avoiding blind reliance without considering factual differences. - Accepted concept of industry does not apply to Government's Law department. - Orders held indefensible, but respondent reinstated, leaving decision on continuation to appellant. - Appeal allowed without costs.
|
