Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Penalty For Monthly MGQ Shortfall If Annual Target Met': Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of Excise Department Demands For Liquor Licensees 'Murder Went Unavenged, But Courts Cannot Convict On Mere Assumptions': Supreme Court Acquits Accused In 1988 Murder Case, Quashes High Court's Remit Order 'NCSC Cannot Pass Mandatory Adjudicatory Orders Directing Payment Of Arrears': Supreme Court Clarifies Commission's Powers Under Article 338 "'Cannot Present Fait Accompli': Supreme Court Upholds Denial Of NOC To Airman For Skipping Prior Permission To Apply For Civil Post" Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Notification For Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances, Quashes 2021 Office Memorandum As Impermissible Executive Overreach Workman Fails To Prove 240 Days Continuous Work; Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Denial Of Reinstatement For "Abandonment Of Service" Party Cannot Take Contradictory Stands In Same Case, Admissions In Pleadings Bind Them Under Order XII Rule 6 CPC: Telangana High Court Delayed Recovery Of Weapon From Open Space Casts Serious Doubt On Prosecution Story: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Convicts Procedural Irregularities By Public Servants Serve As Circumstantial Evidence Of Conspiracy In Corruption Cases: Kerala High Court Blaming Previous Counsel For Omission Does Not Satisfy 'Due Diligence' Test To Amend Plaint After Trial Commences: Punjab & Haryana High Court Muslim Man's Second Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Void Despite Personal Law Permitting Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court Title And Ownership Irrelevant In Suit Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act; Plaint Liable To Be Rejected If Filed Beyond Six Months: Delhi High Court Receipt Of Pension By Widow Can Be Considered To Determine 'Just Compensation' But Not To Deprive Claimants Of Award: Calcutta High Court FSL Report Lacking Scientific Criteria And Data Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Allahabad High Court Issues Directives For Testing Viscera Standard Of Proof In Railway Accident Claims Is Preponderance Of Probabilities, Not Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Gujarat High Court No Second Statutory Appeal Lies Against Conviction By Appellate Court Reversing Acquittal; Revision Is Sole Remedy: Supreme Court Wives' Property Is Their Own, Not Husband's: Supreme Court REJECTS High Court's Succession Formula; Restores Clarity For Christian Inheritance

Erroneous Reinstatement of Employee Unsustainable in Law: Karnataka High

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Karnataka High Court, in a judgment rendered by The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Mulimani, has quashed an award issued by the Labour Court. The case involved a dispute regarding the termination and subsequent regularization of service of the respondent.

The High Court’s decision, delivered on November 29, 2023, hinged on the crucial legal point that the Industrial Tribunal had previously rejected the reference, stating that the respondent was not a workman, and the Executive Engineer, Zilla Panchayat, did not qualify as an industry. The Labour Court, however, failed to consider this rejection and issued an erroneous reinstatement order.

Justice Jyoti Mulimani, in the court’s observations, emphasized the unsustainability of the Labour Court’s decision in law, stating, “The award of the Labour Court is contrary to the law laid down by this Court. Furthermore, the Labour Court, exercising power under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, cannot grant relief of reinstatement that amounts to regularization and appointment to the non-existing post, which is otherwise not permitted in law.”

The Writ of Certiorari was ordered by the High Court, leading to the quashing of the award dated July 11, 2011, passed by the Labour Court in Industrial Disputes No. 125/2003.

This decision by the Karnataka High Court reaffirms the importance of adhering to established legal principles and ensuring that labor disputes are adjudicated in accordance with the law. The judgment serves as a reminder of the significance of correctly interpreting statutory definitions and following precedent in legal proceedings.

Date of Decision: November 29, 2023

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PANCHAYATRAJ ENGINEERING DIVISION VS D.BASAVARAJ       

Latest Legal News