https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190398 Contravention of section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act by dismissing a workman without approval does not, by itself, render the dismissal void or inoperative. A claim for wages under section 33C(2) cannot rest on an unadjudicated assertion that the workman continued in service; the dismissal must first be set aside in proper proceedings. Withdrawal of an approval application is not equivalent to refusal of approval, because no merits-based adjudication occurs. The proper remedies for challenging the dismissal are a complaint under section 33A or a reference under section 10, after which service benefits may be claimed if the dismissal is found unjustified. en-us Tue, 21 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:28:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190398 Contravention of section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act by dismissing a workman without approval does not, by itself, render the dismissal void or inoperative. A claim for wages under section 33C(2) cannot rest on an unadjudicated assertion that the workman continued in service; the dismissal must first be set aside in proper proceedings. Withdrawal of an approval application is not equivalent to refusal of approval, because no merits-based adjudication occurs. The proper remedies for challenging the dismissal are a complaint under section 33A or a reference under section 10, after which service benefits may be claimed if the dismissal is found unjustified. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190398