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>Dismissal Order Effective on Employer's Date: Supreme Court ruling on domestic inquiry defects.</h1> <h3>R. Thiruvirkolam Versus The Presiding Officer & Anr</h3> The Supreme Court held that in cases where a domestic inquiry is found defective but the dismissal is justified based on evidence, the dismissal order ... - Issues involved: Determination of the effective date of dismissal in a case where a domestic inquiry was found defective by the Labour Court.Summary:The appellant, a technician, was dismissed from service by M/s Madras Fertilizers Ltd. after a domestic inquiry on November 18, 1981. The Labour Court later found the inquiry defective but justified the dismissal based on evidence presented. The main issue was whether the dismissal would take effect from the date of the Labour Court's order (December 11, 1985) or the date of the employer's dismissal order. The Constitution Bench decision in P.H. Kalyani v. M/s Air France Calcutta established that in cases where the inquiry is defective but the dismissal is justified based on evidence, the dismissal order relates back to the date it was made by the employer.In the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha, a three-Judge Bench made observations suggesting a different view on the effective date of dismissal. However, the Supreme Court held that these observations were not in line with the Kalyani decision and the juristic principles discussed. Subsequent cases like Desh Raj Gupta v. Industrial Tribunal IV, U.P. Lucknow & Anr. and Rambahu Vyankuji Kheragade v. Maharashtra Road Transport Corporation followed the Kalyani decision, emphasizing that the dismissal takes effect from the date of the employer's original order, not the Labour Court's award date.Ultimately, the Supreme Court concluded that the appellant's dismissal was effective from November 18, 1981, the date of the employer's order, and not from December 11, 1985, the Labour Court's award date. The appellant was not entitled to any relief, and the appeal was dismissed without costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
