Appellate Court Must Re-Appreciate Evidence To Determine Lesser Offence Under Section 386 CrPC If Graver Charge Is Not Sustained: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Provisions Override Other Laws Including Principles Of Res Judicata: Supreme Court Right To Information Act | CCTV Footage Cannot Be Provided Directly To Applicant If It Falls Under Section 8(1)(g) Exemptions: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is The Paramount Consideration In Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Inefficient Case Management By State Law Officers Impedes Justice: Allahabad High Court Directs Principal Secretary (Law) To Reform Procedures Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is A Primary Consideration For Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings, But Virtual Appearance Can Mitigate Hardship: Andhra Pradesh High Court Son Cannot Claim Co-Ownership Or Resist Eviction Based On Alleged Financial Contribution To Property Purchased In Mother’s Name: Delhi High Court Order 33 Rule 1 CPC | Applicant Must Prove Inability To Pay Court Fee With Cogent Evidence; Mere Assertion Of Indigence Is Insufficient: Chhattisgarh High Court Plaintiff Must Establish Independent Right To Possession, Cannot Rely Solely On Lacunae In Defendant’s Evidence: Delhi High Court Successor Cannot Remain Silent: Bombay High Court Upholds Tenant's Right To Purchase Agricultural Land, Rules Rejection Before 1961 Amendment No Bar Single Mother Has Right To Determine Child’s Surname And Alter Biological Father's Name In Birth Certificate: Calcutta High Court Court Can Sanction Professional Fees Of Valuers Exceeding Prescribed Ceiling Post-Assignment: Bombay High Court MACT | Appellate Court Can Reduce Compensation Even If Insurer’s Appeal Challenges Quantum While Claimant Seeks Enhancement: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment Of Written Statement To Correct Internal Inconsistencies Does Not Amount To Withdrawal Of Admission: Delhi High Court Oral Family Partition Valid Even If Unregistered: Jharkhand High Court Power Of Attorney Lacking Explicit Interest Is Revocable Regardless Of 'Irrevocable' Label: Gujarat High Court DRC Act | Summary Eviction Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Extended Litigation By Seeking To File Additional Documents Post-Pleadings: Delhi High Court Financial Institutions Cannot Use 'Goonda-ism' For Repossession: Supreme Court Mandates Compensation For Violation Of Article 21

Termination of Services in Complete Violation of Statutory Provisions – High Court Upholds Tribunal’s Decision on Wrongful Termination

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth, upheld the decision of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court II, Faridabad, confirming the wrongful termination of Mr. Mahabir Singh, a former employee of M/s Prompt Security Services. This ruling affirmed the Tribunal’s findings that the termination was “in complete violation of the statutory provisions” of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, leading to a significant modification in the awarded compensation.

Central to the dispute was the interpretation of Sections 10(1) and 33-C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal had initially ordered reinstatement with 25% back wages for Mr. Singh following his wrongful termination after a lengthy medical leave.

Mr. Singh had served as a Field Worker from April 1, 2005, until his disputed termination on September 30, 2012, after returning from medical leave with a fitness certificate but being denied reentry to his workplace. The management argued that Mr. Singh had voluntarily abandoned his job, a claim that was refuted based on the evidence presented.

Justice Vashisth’s judgment underscored several key observations from the Tribunal’s proceedings:

Admissions and Evidence: The tribunal highlighted admissions by management and the lack of credible defense regarding the alleged job abandonment.

Post-Termination Employment: The fact that Mr. Singh found lower-paying employment post-termination influenced the tribunal’s decision on the extent of back wages.

Decision: The High Court, modifying the Tribunal’s award, granted Mr. Singh a lump-sum compensation of Rs. 3,30,000 instead of reinstatement, considering factors such as his age, employment status post-termination, and the management’s conduct during his medical leave.

Date of Decision: May 01, 2024

M/s Prompt Security Services vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-II, Faridabad and Another

Latest Legal News