Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

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