Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.33 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
"33.....Since such a workman was working on daily-wage
basis and even after he is reinstated, he has no right to seek
regularisation [see State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3) [State
of Karnataka v. Umadevi (3), (2006) 4 SCC 1 :2006 SCC
(L&S) 753] ]. Thus when he cannot claim regularisation and
he has no right to continue even as a daily-wage worker, no
useful purpose is going to be served in reinstating such a
workman and he can be given monetary compensation by the
Court itself inasmuch as if he is terminated again after
reinstatement, he would receive monetary compensation only
in the form of retrenchment compensation and notice
pay......"
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Jagbir Singh vs Haryana State Agr.Marketing Board & Anr on 14 July, 2009
53. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon the judgment passed by
the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Jagbir Singh v. Haryana State
Agriculture Marketing Board and Another6, wherein it was held that the
relief of reinstatement shall not be granted automatically, and the relief to
be granted depends upon the peculiar facts and circumstances wherein the
Labour Court may also award monetary compensation instead of
reinstatement to meet the ends of justice. The relevant extracts of the
same are as follows:
U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. & Anr vs Bijli Mazdoor Sangh & Ors on 17 April, 2007
79. The learned counsel for the PNB has brought the attention of this
Court upon the judgment passed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in U.P.
Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Bijli Mazdoor Sangh,11, wherein the Hon‟ble Court
held that the concept of regularization is clearly linked with Article 14 of
the Constitution of India and if the merits of a case is covered under the
judgment of Uma Devi (Supra), the Industrial Adjudicator can modify
the relief, but that does not dilute the observations made in the judgment
of Uma Devi (Supra).
Court In The Case Of Secretary, State Of ... vs . Uma on 9 April, 2015
9. There is nothing on record to show that the workman has
been engaged or appointed in accordance with the due
process and procedure of appointment, therefore, he is not
entitled to the relief of regularization in view of the decision
captioned as Secretary of State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi
reported in JT(4)2006. However, his removal is illegal and
he is entitled to reinstatement and full back wages w.e.f.
22.1.98 till he is reinstated. Therefore, he be reinstated with
back wages w.e.f. 22.1.91 Award is passed accordingly. File
be consigned to record room."
District Development Officer . vs Satish Kantilal Amrelia on 28 November, 2017
Development Officer v. Satish Kantilal
Amrelia, (2018) 12 SCC 298 : (2018) 2 SCC (L&S)
276].