Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

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