Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.20 seconds)Om Prakash Goel vs Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development ... on 6 May, 1991
9. If on the other hand, it wanted to avail of the power to retrench a surplus workman, that course could be adopted, without giving room for a legitimate complaint by the workman about a stigma cast on him by attributing a grave misconduct. It is unnecessary to traverse what was once a difficult and confusing terrain in service jurisprudence inasmuch as academic discussions and judicial discussions have by now illuminated the path considerably. It is unnecessary to load this judgment with the citations of the various authorities of the Apex Court and of the other High Courts, which have discussed the problem. It would suffice if a reference is made to a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Om Prakash Goel v. The Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. 1992 - I - Lab LJ 469 (SC). Therein, it was a case of a person against whom a charge-sheet was issued alleging misconduct involving an abetment of embezzlement and the like. The said person was ultimately served with an order terminating his services simpliciter.
Anoop Jaiswal vs Government Of India & Anr on 24 January, 1984
After referring to the earlier decisions in Anoop Jaiswal v. Government of India 1984 (48) FLR 258 (SC), Nepal Singh v. State of U.P. , Jamail Singh v. State of Punjab 1986-II LLJ 268 (SC) the principles were enunciated in paragraph 4 and were applied to the facts of case in paragraph 5. The conclusion was in the following terms:
Hindustan Steels Ltd., Rourkela vs A. K. Roy & Ors on 18 December, 1969
See Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. A.K. Roy AIR 1969 SC 1238. It is unnecessary to multiply decisions dealing with the same aspect. In the present case, the workman was appointed as a clerk, and at the time of the termination of his services, was to perform the duties of a salesman. The post is not one of sensitive confidence. The misconduct alleged is not in relation to a violent act, or subversive of the interest of the very industry. It is difficult to foresee totally calamitous results befalling the industry if the sales promotion programme the basis
of alleged disobedience is postponed by a day or two. Again, the misconduct alleged is not one invoking a high handed action on the part of the workman. It did not have the effect of shocking the morale of the managerial personnel. Scanning through the relevant records we do find substance in the plea of the workman that he could not undertake a trip to a far off place when the direction in that behalf was received by him 5 1/2 hours later than the scheduled time of departure. The direction was impossible of performance in such a situation. He was to be away from home for a fairly long period. This would entail making arrangements and adjustments even in relation to his domestic matters. There was hardly any time for attending to any one. of those details. The management has a case that they had orally apprised the workman about the necessity for him to move out on sales promotion, somewhere earlier in time. There is, however, absolutely no reference to any such oral instructions in the communication dated 12th May 1978. In the absence of other materials, we cannot, therefore, accept the belated plea of oral information as put forward by the management. The dominance of innocence on the part of the workman and a mass suspicion about the conduct of the management, emerge in that situation. These and other factors, persuade us to hold that the relief of reinstatement cannot be withheld from the workman. We accordingly hold that the workman will be entitled to reinstatement in service.
Gamon India Limited vs Niranjan Dass on 5 December, 1983
14. This takes us to the somewhat difficult task of determinating the arrears of wages for the period involved. It has to be observed in this connection that in the computation of the backwages in the case of a reinstated workman, the benefit of revised wages or salary arising out of a revision of pay scales, as also yearly increments and revised dear-ness allowance should also enter the calculation of arrears of backwages. Leave encashment and bonus, if other workmen in the same category have been paid the same would also be his dues. Interest at 12% per annum from the date the amount became due, is also held to be one of such entitlement of a workman in such a situation. See Gammon India Limited v. Niranjan Dass. : .
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1