Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.22 seconds)
The President, Srirangam Co-Operative ... vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court And ... on 15 March, 1996 cites

State Bank Of India vs Shri N. Sundara Money on 16 January, 1976

In the said decision the Supreme Court has referred to an earlier decision, in State Bank of India v. N. Sundara Money (1976-I-LLJ-478) where the Supreme Court while considering the scope of Section 2(oo) has indicated that the order of termination which would attract the provisions of the I.D.Act is the result of the exercise of violation by the employer. This is what the Supreme Court has said:
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 323 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Eranalloor Service Co-Operative Bank ... vs Labour Court And Ors. on 30 May, 1986

However, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on a judgment of the Kerala High Court in Eranalloor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Labour Court and Ors. (1986-II-LLJ-492). That was a case wherein the workman while working as commission agent was appointed as salesman on a temporary basis, subject to the approval of the Registrar of the Co-operative Societies. At that time when he was appointed as salesman, he did not have the requisite qualification prescribed under the Rules. His request for appointment as salesman was turned down by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, therefore, the bank resolved to terminate his services and accordingly terminated the services. The learned single Judge held that the fact that the appointment was contrary to the rules the award passed by the Labour Court directing reinstatement on applying Section 25F of the Act was not warranted as Section 25F of the Act did not apply to such a case. The relevant portion of the judgment of the learned single Judge is as follows: (at Page 495) "In order to appreciate this line of approach to the issue it is necessary to consider the scope of Sections 25F and 2(oo) of the I.D.Act. Section 2(oo) suggests that the person who claims the benefit of Section 25F must be one, validly appointed in the service of the employer. The service must be capable of being continued until any of the events envisaged under Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Section 2(oo) happens. In short the person who claims the benefit of Section 25F shall establish that he is in the service of the employer having been appointed validly. It should be remembered that it is the contract of service that is terminated. A service cannot be terminated unless it is capable of being continued.
Kerala High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 18 - Full Document
1