Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (6.47 seconds)The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 18 in Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd vs Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha on 19 November, 1979
7. The next point for consideration is whether the matter has to go back to the Labour Court with a direction to appreciate the evidence on record and record its finding on the misconduct alleged against the workman. Ordinarily, I would have made a direction on these lines, but after a lapse of nearly 10 years from the date of termination of the services of the workman, the interests of justice would not warrant the remand of this matter to the Labour Court. Further, this Court in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Gujarat Steel Tubes Limited vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazadoor Sabha & Others supra could re-assess the evidence on record and record a finding which the Labour Court was empowered to record in exercise of its power under Section 11A of the Act. Therefore, the evidence on record will have to be examined for ascertaining whether the petitioner had proved the alleged misconduct against the workman.
Section 10 in Karnataka Co-Operative Societies Act, 1959 [Entire Act]
The Life Insurance Corporation Of India vs D. J. Bahadur & Ors on 10 November, 1980
The Labour Court placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the Life Insurance Corporation of India vs. D. J. Bahadur & Others (1981 - I - LLJ - 1) and accordingly it rejected the contention of the workman based on the provisions of the general Act, namely, the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act. But the second contention raised by the workman that the termination of his services was bad in law since no enquiry was held was accepted by the Labour Court and it made the impinged award. The plea of the petitioner to rely on the evidence on the alleged misconduct against the workman was turned down by the Labour Court on the ground that the petitioner having not mentioned the specific charges of the misconduct in the order of the termination it was not open to it to rely on any evidence before the Labour Court and the termination order itself was bad in law.