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>Supreme Court overturns termination, emphasizes natural justice & statutory compliance</h1> <h3>D.K. YADAV Versus. J.M.A. INDUSTRIES LTD.</h3> The appeal challenged the termination of the appellant's service, upheld by the Labour Court, Haryana. The termination was deemed legal based on the ... - Issues Involved:1. Legality of the termination of the appellant's service.2. Applicability of principles of natural justice.3. Compliance with statutory provisions under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.Summary:1. Legality of the termination of the appellant's service:The appeal was against the award of the Labour Court, Haryana, which upheld the termination of the appellant's service as legal and valid. The respondent claimed that the appellant wilfully absented from duty continuously for more than 8 days without leave or prior information, invoking clause 13(2)(iv) of its Certified Standing Order. The Tribunal found that the appellant failed to prove his case and that the respondent's action was in accordance with the standing orders, not constituting termination or retrenchment u/s 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. Applicability of principles of natural justice:The Supreme Court emphasized that the principles of natural justice must be read into standing order No. 13(2)(iv). The court held that the impugned action was violative of the principles of natural justice as no opportunity was given to the appellant to present his case, nor was any domestic enquiry conducted. The court stated that any action affecting the right to livelihood must be just, fair, and reasonable, in conformity with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.3. Compliance with statutory provisions under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947:The court referred to the definition of 'retrenchment' u/s 2(oo) and the mandatory procedure u/s 25F of the Act. It was held that the termination of service without complying with the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions was invalid. The court cited precedents where similar actions were deemed arbitrary and unjust.Conclusion:The appeal was allowed, setting aside the Labour Court's award and quashing the respondent's letter dated December 12, 1980. The court directed the respondent to reinstate the appellant forthwith and pay 50% of the back wages within three months. The parties were to bear their own costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
