Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (3.47 seconds)The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Ram Manohar Lohia Joint Hospital vs Munna Prasad Saini on 20 September, 2021
11. The Supreme Court in the case of Ram Manohar Lohia
Joint Hospital Vs. Munna Prasad Saini reported in 2021 (iii)
MPWN 29 has held as under:-
Deputy Executive Engineer vs Kuberbhai Kanjibhai on 7 January, 2019
In Deputy Executive Engineer v. Kuberbhai
Kanjibhai, [(2019) 4 SCC 307] this Court had referred
to several earlier judgments and had quoted with
approval the ratio as expounded in Bharat Sanchar
Nigam Limited v. Bhurumal [(2014) 7 SCC 177] to the
following effect:
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
34. The reasons for denying the relief of
reinstatement in such cases are obvious. It is
trite law that when the termination is found to
be illegal because of non-payment of
retrenchment compensation and notice pay as
mandatorily required under section 25F of the
Industrial Disputes Act, even after
reinstatement, it is always open to the
management to terminate the services of that
employee by paying him the retrenchment
compensation. 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)]. 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. In such a situation, giving the relief
6 W.P.No.1578/2017 & W.P.No.17721/2018
of reinstatement, that too after a long gap,
would not serve any purpose.
State Of Uttarakhand vs Raj Kumar on 7 January, 2019
11. This dictum was again followed in State of
Uttarakhand and Another v. Raj Kumar [(2019)14 SCC
353] and Ranbir Singh v. Executive Eng. P.W.D. [2021
SCC OnLine SC 670].
Ranbir Singh vs Executive Eng.P.W.D. on 2 September, 2021
11. This dictum was again followed in State of
Uttarakhand and Another v. Raj Kumar [(2019)14 SCC
353] and Ranbir Singh v. Executive Eng. P.W.D. [2021
SCC OnLine SC 670].
Jayant Vasantrao Hiwarkar vs Anoop Ganpatrao Bobde . on 18 November, 2016
12. The Supreme Court in the case of Jayant Vasantrao
Hiwarkar Vs. Anoop Ganaptrao Bobde reported in (2017)11 SCC
244 has upheld the grant of compensation in lieu of reinstatement as
the respondent had merely worked for a period of one year.
Incharge Officer And Anr vs Shankar Shetty on 31 August, 2010
In Incharge Officer v.
Shankar Shetty, it was held that those cases where
the workman had worked on daily-wage basis, and
worked merely for a period of 240 days or 2 to 3
years and where the termination had taken place
many years ago, the recent trend was to grant
compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Jagbir Singh vs Haryana Agricultural University on 10 July, 2014
Jaipur
Development Authority v. Ramsahai, GDA v.
Ashok Kumar and Mahboob Deepak v. Nagar
Panchayat, Gajraula and stated as follows: (Jagbir
Singh case, SCC pp. 330 & 335, paras 7 & 14)