Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.59 seconds)The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Deepali Gundu Surwase vs Kranti Junior Adhyapak & Ors on 12 August, 2013
Further in 'Deepali Gundu Surwase Vs Kranti Junior
Adhyapak Mahavidyalya (D.Ed) & Ors. reported as
(2013) in SCC 324, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in
the case of wrongful termination of a worker,
reinstatement with continuity of service and back
wages was a normal rule. However, the payment of
back wages has to be determined as per the facts and
circumstances of his case and cannot be automatically
granted on a order of reinstatement of the worker. The
worker has to specifically raise the claim for back
wages as well as present supporting evidence
demonstrating his unemployment. This court also set
out various factors for calculating the back wages,
which include, among others.
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 10 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Rajasthan State Road Transport ... vs Phool Chand (D) Through Lrs. on 20 September, 2018
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Rajasthan
State Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs Sri Phool
Chand' in Civil Appeal No. 1756/2010 has reiterated
that to be entitled for back wages during the pendency
of proceedings, the employee should not be employed
in any establishment during the pendency of such
proceedings. Further if a worker had been employed
during the pendency of such proceedings and had been
receiving adequate remuneration, no back wages would
be payable for the period of such pendency. It was
further held that a worker cannot automatically be
entitled to back wages and has no right to claim back
wages purely on the basis that the dismissal order has
been set aside. As held :
Section 23 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Tapash Kumar Paul vs Bsnl & Anr on 28 January, 2014
In the case titled as Tapash Kumar Paul Vs BSNL &
Anr, and reported as of JT 2014 (7) SC 589, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has held that the court may either award the compensation
or order for reinstatement in the cases which do not fall within
LIR No.1205/2017
Sh. Inderjeet Singh vs. M/s. Autolink Enterprises (India) Pvt. Ltd.