All employees regardless of casuals, ad hoc, part-time or daily wagers are entitled to gratuity.
2020 LLR 250
DELHI HIGH COURT
Dismissal from service for disruption of work for one hour is liable to be set aside.
2020 LLR 237
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Police will ensure the proper flow of ingress and egress of men and material necessary for proper functioning of a factory.
2020 LLR 275
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
Reinstatement justified when retrenchment compensation and one-month notice is not paid on termination.
2020 LLR 248
DELHI HIGH COURT
Enquiry, if not possible due to tough opposition by a union, can be held by Labour Court. Mad.
2020 LLR 277
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Probationer has no right to be regularised against the wishes of the Management.
2020 LLR 242
DELHI HIGH COURT
Termination of a probationer should be by a simple order.
2020 LLR 273
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
When an enquiry is held fair and proper, punishment can't be modified by Labour Court.
2020 LLR 258
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
If an unauthorized absence is due to compelling circumstances, termination is not justified.
2020 LLR 253
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Enquiry Officer is not always bound by the judgment of the criminal court.
2020 LLR 238
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Nominee of the principal employer has to ensure that the contractor pays wages to his workers.
2020 LLR 266
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
An employer has to start evidence in an enquiry.
2020 LLR 253
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Labour Court can determine lump sum compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back wages.
2020 LLR 248
DELHI HIGH COURT
Unless prescribed, the maximum period of probation may be reasonably extended.
2020 LLR 242
DELHI HIGH COURT
Labour Court will interfere in punishment only when it is shockingly disproportionate.
2020 LLR 277
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Merely because of one or two activities were supervisory in nature, the workman could not be termed a non-workman.
2020 LLR 282
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Disputed question of facts cannot be resolved in writ petition.
2020 LLR 273
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Burden to prove the unauthorized absence is upon management.
2020 LLR 253
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Reinstatement with back wages is justified when the enquiry is vitiated.
2020 LLR 237
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Trainees when working as regular employees will be treated as employees for the EPF Act.
2020 LLR 307
MADRAS HIGH COURT
No coercive step be taken for recovery of dues till the disposal of the review application.
2020 LLR 337
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Functional or financial integrality is the main factor for clubbing of two units.
2020 LLR 322
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Recovery proceedings not to be initiated until the prescribed time for filing appeal has expired.
2020 LLR 338
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Recovery proceedings not to be initiated until the prescribed time for filing appeal has expired.
2020 LLR 351
MADRAS HIGH COURT
No benefit of provident fund for those who have already superannuated, expired or resigned.
2020 LLR 289
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Coercive steps for recovery of EPF dues despite the pendency of stay application is not tenable.
2020 LLR 342
KERALA HIGH COURT
Employees have the first charge over the properties of the defaulter company for recovery of EPF dues.
2020 LLR 328
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Delay beyond 120 days is not extendable either by the Tribunal or even by the High Court.
2020 LLR 297
DELHI HIGH COURT
Mere common ownership of new establishment is not a necessary factor for clubbing.
2020 LLR 322
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 340
KERALA HIGH COURT
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 341
KERALA HIGH COURT
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 343
KERALA HIGH COURT
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 350
KERALA HIGH COURT
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 336
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Assaulting, threatening and using filthy language for senior official will justify workman's dismissal.
2020 LLR 277
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Accident compensation will be payable on death due to snake bite while on duty.
2020 LLR 285
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Any director/officer can be prosecuted only when company is also a party as accused.
2020 LLR 275
MADRAS HIGH COURT
If misconduct is not proved, penalty can't be imposed on the basis of past record. D.T.C. vs. Krishna Bahal,
2020 LLR 246
DELHI HIGH COURT
Termination of services for non compliance of transfer, without enquiry, is not sustainable.
2020 LLR 282
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dismissal from service is justified when employment is obtained on basis of bogus certificate.
2020 LLR 268
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Principal employer shall pay if the contractor fails to pay wages to his workers.
2020 LLR 266
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Dismissal justified when the employee is held guilty of accepting gratification.
2020 LLR 238
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Payment by installments can be allowed if the employer is facing financial difficulties.
2020 LLR 326
MADRAS HIGH COURT
EPF Authorities are not empowered to initiate any action directly against the Bank.
2020 LLR 328
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Any amendment to the Scheme, beneficial to employees shall be automatically applicable.
2020 LLR 300
DELHI HIGH COURT
Burden to prove functional integrality between two companies is upon EPF Authority.
2020 LLR 322
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Tribunal can allow time for filing appeal up to 60 days beyond first 60 days.
2020 LLR 307
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Staying of recovery order is justified in view of sickness of the Company for a long time.
2020 LLR 349
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Once any claim is received under Pension Scheme, the certificate would be required.
2020 LLR 345
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Limitation of 60 days in filing an appeal is extendable by the Tribunal on account of sufficient cause of delay.
2020 LLR 297
DELHI HIGH COURT
Questions of merit to be decided by EPF authority and not in the writ petition.
2020 LLR 327
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Trainees to be treated as regular employees, if not under Apprentices Act or Standing Orders.
2020 LLR 307
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Contractual employees not entitled to be covered under the PF Trust created by the Company.
2020 LLR 289
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Insisting payment within a shorter time before the expiry of the limitation period for appeal would defeat the very purpose of filing appeal.
2020 LLR 338
MADRAS HIGH COURT
High Court can grant interim stay for recovery if the EPF Tribunal is not functioning.
2020 LLR 348
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
If the petitioner has already remitted a heavy amount on interest, further recovery can be stayed.
2020 LLR 349
JHARKHAND HIGH COURT
Contractual employees are entitled to the benefits of PF Trust from the filing of their writ petition.
2020 LLR 289
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
EPF Scheme provides that relaxation is liable for withdrawal for breach of any condition.
2020 LLR 300
DELHI HIGH COURT
Dispute between bank and defaulter company has no connection with the settlement of EPF dues.
2020 LLR 328
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Writ petition without exhausting the statutory remedy of appeal is not maintainable.
2020 LLR 307
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Para 27 of the Scheme provides that appropriate Government may lay down any further condition for continued exemption.
2020 LLR 300
DELHI HIGH COURT
