An employee, guilty of theft, is not entitled to any relief in adjudication.
2012 LLR 8
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A trade union can''t oppose promotion on the plea that it will reduce its membership.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
No reinstatement to an employee who loses management''s confidence.
2012 LLR 8
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A workman cannot be forced to work with a different employer without his consent.
2012 LLR 76
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Reinstatement is not a rule in every case of wrongful termination.
2012 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Nature and scope of departmental enquiry vis-Ã -vis criminal proceedings are different.
2012 LLR 8
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
HRA, overtime, bonus, commission, washing allowances will not attract EPF contributions
2012 LLR 22
DELHI HIGH COURT
Assaulting of superior at a workplace is gross indiscipline to justify dismissal.
2012 LLR 53
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
A legal advisor on monthly retainership not a ''workman''.
2012 LLR 26
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Probationers are not entitled to demand reason for their termination.
2012 LLR 46
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Cess on building construction is charged for special service rendered to individual''s agency.
2012 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Special allowance, DA, conveyance and other allowances paid to all employees would be treated as basic wages.
2012 LLR 42
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Ex-parte enquiry justified in the absence of stay.
2012 LLR 34
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reinstatement with full back-wages is not a rule when termination is held illegal.
2012 LLR 59
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Habitual absence of the workman amounts to grave misconduct.
2012 LLR 70
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Denial of representation in enquiry, by a Union leader violates principles of natural justice.
2012 LLR 95
MADRAS HIGH COURT
He, who alleges unfair labour practice, must plead and prove.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Punishments of dismissal are to be rarely interfered by Labour Court under section 11A of I.D. Act.
2012 LLR 53
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Deductions can be challenged before Authority under Payment of Wages Act only when wages are less than prescribed ceiling.
2012 LLR 48
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Workers or Union must be impleaded while challenging coverage under ESI Act.
2012 LLR 73
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Compensation in lieu of reinstatement is appropriate when workman has worked for 240 days before termination.
2012 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Workers have a right to seek promotion.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A worker can''t be denied representation in enquiry by a union leader when employer is represented by a legally trained person.
2012 LLR 95
MADRAS HIGH COURT
If dismissal is disproportionate to misconduct, reinstatement with consequential benefits should result.
2012 LLR 86
DELHI HIGH COURT
A workman not opting for service on change of ownership will be entitled to retrenchment compensation from transferor
2012 LLR 76
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A shift supervisor is not a ''workman''.
2012 LLR 30
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Discharge of a bus driver for rash driving and causing accident not justified.
2012 LLR 43
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Payment of last drawn wages u/s 17B of the I.D. Act are not refundable.
2012 LLR 16
DELHI HIGH COURT
Failure of contractor''s workers to prove that they are directly appointed will not make the contract as sham.
2012 LLR 16
DELHI HIGH COURT
Preliminary findings can''t be challenged in writ petition.
2012 LLR 34
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Certifying Officer should ensure that a proper mechanism for representation of workman in enquiry is provided while certifying the Standing Orders.
2012 LLR 95
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principles of natural justice not violated for non-supply of documents with the charge-sheet when charges are admitted.
2012 LLR 89
DELHI HIGH COURT
Labour Court should not have modified dismissal of workman for habitual absence.
2012 LLR 70
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Requirement of "proof beyond doubt" is not necessary in departmental inquiry.
2012 LLR 43
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Writ petition against preliminary findings of the lower court is not entertainable.
2012 LLR 34
MADRAS HIGH COURT
An order of reference can''t be challenged in High Court.
2012 LLR 19
DELHI HIGH COURT
Determination of money towards damages for delayed payment of provident fund must be clear.
2012 LLR 37
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Manpower suppliers will have the principal relationship for provident fund purposes.
2012 LLR 22
DELHI HIGH COURT
A plea, not taken before the concerned authorities under an EPF Act, not tenable before Reviewing Authority.
2012 LLR 42
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Creating avenues for promotion of the workmen would not require notice of change.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Disciplinary proceedings not vitiated for non-supply of documents if no prejudice has been suffered.
2012 LLR 89
DELHI HIGH COURT
High Court, in writ jurisdiction, not to interfere in factual findings of the Labour Court
2012 LLR 30
MADRAS HIGH COURT
A dispute can be referred when employer denies ''employer-employee'' relationship.
2012 LLR 19
DELHI HIGH COURT
EPF Appellate Tribunal has to consider all relevant aspects instead of passing stereotype order.
2012 LLR 14
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Standard of proof required in criminal trial is beyond reasonable doubt but not in domestic enquiry.
2012 LLR 8
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
An industrial settlement aims at industrial peace and harmony.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dismissal of a Bank Branch Manager is not justified when only one of 4 charges partly proved.
2012 LLR 86
DELHI HIGH COURT
Reference order is an administrative function.
2012 LLR 19
DELHI HIGH COURT
Offering of promotion with open mind will not be treated as unfair labour practice.
2012 LLR 79
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
