No relief when workman abandoned services and joined someone else during pendency of enquiry.
2025 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Charitable institution, with the object of helping orphaned children, is not ''industry'' under the ID Act.
2025 LLR 43
DELHI HIGH COURT
Stealing property and disrupting work by calling union members are grave misconducts.
2025 LLR 51
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Special incentive paid temporarily for bearing additional expenses during pandemic is not 'wages' under ESI Act.
2025 LLR 3
DELHI HIGH COURT
Principle of 'first come - last go' is not applicable when employees were not similarly situated.
2025 LLR 7
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
The new contractor cannot be forced to engage workers of the previous contractor.
2025 LLR 17
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Children's education related difficulties cannot be a ground to avoid compliance of transfer order.
2025 LLR 25
DELHI HIGH COURT
Mere filing of affidavit by the workman that he worked for more than 240 days is not sufficient.
2025 LLR 28
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
No employer-employee relationship in the absence of appointment letter and day-to-day work.
2025 LLR 43
DELHI HIGH COURT
No parallel prosecution when proceedings relating to an offence under the Factories Act are pending.
2025 LLR 22
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Even if no inquiry has been held by an employer, the Tribunal has to give an opportunity to the employer and employee to adduce evidence before it.
2025 LLR WEB 367
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Forfeiture of gratuity is proper when employee was terminated for causing embezzlement.
2025 LLR WEB 368
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Writ petition would not lie when the appropriate Government refused to abolish engagement of contract labour with respect to a particular service.
2025 LLR WEB 369
ORISSA HIGH COURT
Contractual employees are entitled to maternity leave under Maternity Benefit Act however, honorarium for such leave may be denied if prescribed by specific departmental policies.
2025 LLR WEB 370
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Prolonged delays in industrial disputes warrant equitable compensation rather than regularization when workmen have reached superannuation or disengagement is long-standing.
2025 LLR WEB 371
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Withdrawal of reference extinguishes right to re-agitate issue, barring subsequent claims for relief under ID Act.
2025 LLR WEB 372
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
Jurisdiction for recovery of money under the Working Journalists Act is determined by situs of the cause of action, including where a substantial part of employment occurred.
2025 LLR WEB 373
DELHI HIGH COURT
The employers themselves cannot self-proclaim that they have the hospital facilities or better benefits and remain not paying the contribution.
2025 LLR WEB 374
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Unless the punishment is disproportionate to the gravity of the conduct, or there are mitigating circumstances, Labour Court cannot reduce the punishment merely by way of sympathy.
2025 LLR WEB 375
DELHI HIGH COURT
When all the witnesses reside in one state and the complaint was also filed in the same state, the POSH enquiry cannot be conducted in another state.
2025 LLR WEB 376
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Grant of back-wages to the extent of 75% without any foundational pleading much less any statement that the workmen remained out of employment is wrong.
2025 LLR WEB 377
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Reinstatement without back wages is proper when the workman spent years litigating before the wrong forum.
2025 LLR WEB 378
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
The type of work performed by the Sales Promotion Employees / Medical Representatives cannot be regarded as 'technical' or 'skilled'.
2025 LLR WEB 379
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Claim cannot be rejected merely because the trade union was registered after the demand was raised.
2025 LLR WEB 380
MADRAS HIGH COURT
A contract of service does give rise to relationship of master and servant but a contract for service does not give rise to such a relationship.
2025 LLR WEB 381
ODISHA HIGH COURT
Notice to the Govt. not necessary at time of retrenchment when notice pay and compensation are paid.
2025 LLR 7
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Additional amount paid to deprive the employee of social security schemes should not be considered.
2025 LLR 3
DELHI HIGH COURT
Plea of forced resignation cannot be taken when the same was not obtained on a blank paper.
2025 LLR 36
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Demand notice beyond a reasonable period is bad in the eye of law.
2025 LLR 38
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
No Interest on delayed gratuity if it was owing to employee's fault and authority's permission was taken.
2025 LLR 14
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Benefits under the BOCW Act cannot be suspended during elections.
2025 LLR 32
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Unauthorised absence and not replying to management's letters warrants termination.
2025 LLR 1
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A person engaged in construction of a building would be entitled to accident compensation.
2025 LLR 57
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Employer can reduce his contribution from over and above the statutory rate back to the ceiling limit.
2025 LLR 71
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Tribunal can direct pre-deposit only as a conditional order for grant of stay of S.14B order.
2025 LLR 79
MADRAS HIGH COURT
No FIR to be filed against the establishment when proceedings under section 7A were pending.
2025 LLR 87
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Trainees performing the same work as regular employees would be covered under the EPF Act.
2025 LLR 103
KERALA HIGH COURT
A person who was not the occupier/manager during the period of default cannot be held liable when there was no transfer of establishment.
2025 LLR 94
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
No damages can be levied when employer had to divert funds to save the industry and employees.
2025 LLR 92
MADRAS HIGH COURT
The principles of natural justice are explicit in section 14B of the EPF Act itself.
2025 LLR 85
KERALA HIGH COURT
Retaining allowance is 'basic wages' under the EPF Act.
2025 LLR 65
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Order dismissing review application without considering error on the face of record to be set aside.
2025 LLR 62
DELHI HIGH COURT
Writ challenging damages and interest pending before the HC for a long time would not be remanded back.
2025 LLR 82
MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT
Proceedings for imposition of interest would be stayed when the order imposing damages was stayed.
2025 LLR 101
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Drivers and accountants, paid regular wages in the name of stipend, are 'employees' under the EPF Act.
2025 LLR 103
KERALA HIGH COURT
Recovery through all persons connected with the defaulting establishment can be ordered.
2025 LLR 116
TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Show cause notice cannot be challenged in when there was violation any principle of law.
2025 LLR 110
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Rejecting request for adjournment and imposing damages without hearing would be illegal.
2025 LLR 85
KERALA HIGH COURT
Employee can't enforce employer's voluntary contribution of larger amounts as statutory obligation.
2025 LLR 71
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Interest imposed under Section 7-Q of the EPF Act cannot be waived of or reduced.
2025 LLR 114
KERALA HIGH COURT
EPF Authorities can attach bank account if the S.7A order was not challenged within the limitation period.
2025 LLR 100
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
