• Once the Standing Orders become applicable, the introduction of any new set of regulations by the employer is impermissible.
  • Contract is sham when the workman was initially employed with the principal employer and later through the contractor and supervision was also exercised by the principal employer.
  • Lay-off compensation must be paid strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, and not under any private settlement entered into between the management and the workmen.
  • Mere order of dismissal for riotous/disorderly conduct would not by itself warrant forfeiture of gratuity, unless a separate order of forfeiture is passed.
  • There is no necessity to look into the educational qualifications of workers, if it is established that the contract workers are performing the same or similar kind of work as compared to the workers of Principal Employer.
  • Mere production of a registration certificate under the Shops Act will not entitle an entity to claim retention of the voluntary registration that it has obtained under the ESI Act.
  • Deductions from wages for earned leave as well as the recovery of losses caused by the employee are permissible even after retirement.
  • The obligation on the employer to pay gratuity does not depend on application to be submitted by the employee.
  • Panel Counsel of the establishment cannot participate as an external member in the IC proceedings under the PoSH Act.
  • The CGIT can pass ex-parte ad interim orders restraining the EPFO from recovering dues calculated under section 7A of the EPF Act subject to deposit of some amount by the establishment.
  • Delay in raising industrial dispute cannot be condoned merely because the advocate of workman was negligent.
  • Plea of loss of confidence can only be taken when the workman was holding a position of trust which was abused and continuing him in service would be detrimental to the security of the establishment.
  • Real employer behind facade of partnership cannot evade liability for award where evidence shows control and ownership remained with same entity.