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>Labour employee wins reinstatement after proving continuous service from 1995-1999 without proper termination notice</h1> <h3>Chaitram Maywade Versus The State of M.P. and another</h3> Chaitram Maywade Versus The State of M.P. and another - TMI Issues involved: The issues involved in this case include the validity of termination of service, entitlement to reinstatement, and the award of compensation instead of reinstatement.Validity of termination of service and entitlement to reinstatement: The petitioner, a Labour, filed a petition against the order of termination of service. The petitioner had worked continuously from 1995 to 1999 without any break. The Labour Court rejected the petitioner's application for reinstatement and awarded compensation of Rs.10,000. The petitioner argued that his case was similar to other employees who were reinstated with back wages. The Labour Court held the termination of the petitioner's service as illegal and uncalled for. The Court found that the petitioner's claim remained unrebutted and he was entitled to reinstatement based on the parity with other cases.Award of compensation instead of reinstatement: The State opposed the prayer for reinstatement, citing judgments allowing compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The Labour Court awarded compensation of Rs.10,000 instead of reinstatement, based on the employee's appointment legality and work period. The Court found that the Labour Court should have maintained parity with other cases where reinstatement was granted. The Division Bench judgment highlighted the discretion of the Court in awarding reinstatement, back wages, or compensation based on the circumstances of each case.Decision: The Court quashed the order of awarding compensation and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner within two months. The Court clarified that the question of back wages did not arise as the petitioner's employment status during the case was not provided. The petitioner was instructed to return any compensation received after reinstatement. The writ petition was partly allowed, emphasizing the right to reinstatement over compensation in this case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
