Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.27 seconds)Glaxo Laboratories vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court ... on 6 October, 1983
In Galaxo Laboratories' case (supra) the striking workmen boarded the bus and manhandled the lawful workmen who are desired to report for duty, on which they were charge-sheeted and they approached the Labour Court. The Labour Court held that upon a true construction of Certified Standing Order the Company is not entitled to charge-sheet the workmen for alleged acts of misconduct said to have been committed by them outside the premises of the establishment and not in the vicinity thereof. In view of the same, it was not open to the employer to hold an enquiry into the alleged act of misconduct against the workmen, which was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court and also the Supreme Court.
Mahendra Singh Dhantwal vs Hindustan Motors Ltd. & Ors on 7 May, 1976
In M.S. Dhantwal's case (supra) the Supreme Court had an occasion to consider the effect of Section 33(2)(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which makes it obligatory on the part of the employer to make an application to the Tribunal under the proviso only when he discharges or dismiss a workman for misconduct and whether such misconduct should be enumerated in the Standing Orders or not and held in para-26 as under:
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 3 in The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 [Entire Act]
The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946
1