https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178056 The Supreme Court addressed the jurisdictional issue of whether the respondent workman was employed by the bank in an industrial dispute regarding the termination of the driver's services. The Court analyzed the control and supervision aspects and concluded that the driver was not employed by the bank but by the Area Manager, supported by an allowance provided by the bank for personal use. The Court emphasized the importance of control and direction in determining the employer-employee relationship, highlighting the need for fair employment practices and the prevention of exploitation. The Court allowed the appeal of the Management, considering social justice and technical evidence, and directed the Management to pay the balance amount to the workman within a specified timeframe. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:53:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178056 The Supreme Court addressed the jurisdictional issue of whether the respondent workman was employed by the bank in an industrial dispute regarding the termination of the driver's services. The Court analyzed the control and supervision aspects and concluded that the driver was not employed by the bank but by the Area Manager, supported by an allowance provided by the bank for personal use. The Court emphasized the importance of control and direction in determining the employer-employee relationship, highlighting the need for fair employment practices and the prevention of exploitation. The Court allowed the appeal of the Management, considering social justice and technical evidence, and directed the Management to pay the balance amount to the workman within a specified timeframe. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 11 Jan 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178056