TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Industrial Tribunal Orders Equal Pay & Regularization, Criticizes Unfair Labor Practices</h1> <h3>BHAGWATI PRASAD AND ORS. Versus. DELHI STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION</h3> The Industrial Tribunal recommended regularizing daily rated workers, granting equal pay for equal work, and criticized unfair labor practices. The ... - Issues involved:The issues involved in the judgment include seeking relief under Art. 32 of the Constitution for regularizing services, equal wages, unfair labor practices, violation of right to equality of pay under Art. 14, and non-regularization of services.Judgment Details:Issue 1: Regularization of Services and Equal WagesThe petitioners, daily rated workers seeking relief under Art. 32, contended that despite continuous service, the respondent resorted to unfair labor practices by creating artificial breaks in service. The Industrial Tribunal found that petitioners are entitled to equal pay for equal work under Art. 39(d) and Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It recommended regularizing the petitioners, granting increments, and criticized the dismissal of workers without following the rule of last come first go. The Tribunal also found non-regularization due to uncertain contract validity as a pretense and suggested framing a scheme for regularization.Issue 2: Confirmation of EmploymentThe controversy centered around whether some petitioners had the requisite qualifications for confirmation in their posts. The Court emphasized practical experience gained during work and directed the regularization of senior-most workmen with immediate effect and the remaining petitioners in a phased manner. It mandated equal pay, reinstatement of ousted workers, and consideration for promotions. The respondent was directed to deposit a sum for the Industrial Tribunal's remuneration.Separate Judgment by Judges:No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
