Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.34 seconds)
Pooja Saroj vs Ministry Of Labour And Employment Govt. ... on 10 February, 2022 cites

Pooja Saroj vs Labor Commissioner & Ors on 17 September, 2021

5. The background of the case is that the Petitioner/Workman (hereinafter "Workman") was working with Respondent No.5-ICICI Bank, Videocon Tower, Jhandewalan Extension Branch, New Delhi as a Deputy Manager. She was transferred to Sirsa branch, Haryana by the Respondent Bank and the same came to be challenged before this Court by way of writ petition being W.P.(C) 10462/2021 titled Pooja Saroj v. Labour Commissioner & Ors. Since the Workman did not join in Sirsa, the services of the Petitioner were terminated by the Bank. Allegedly, the reason why the Petitioner states that she could not join at Sirsa branch, was because her residence was in Delhi and she was also having some medical conditions due to COVID-19. However, the Bank decided to terminate her.
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - P M Singh - Full Document

Pooja Ghai vs The Icci Bank Ltd. And Others on 15 November, 2013

7. Immediately thereafter, the Petitioner approached the CGIT in October, 2021 vide DID No. 123/2021/1964 titled Pooja Saroj v. ICICI Bank. The matter was stated to be listed before the CGIT on 16th November, 2021 and on 4th January, 2022. On the last date of hearing, the matter is stated to have been simply adjourned to 6th April, 2022. Mr. Mishra, ld. counsel for the Workman, submits that the orders of the said dates are not available on the website of CGIT. Additionally, only one bench of the CGIT is stated to be functioning. Further he submits that the data relating to the CGIT in respect of number of cases and the pendency thereof are also not available on the CGIT website. He contrasts this position with the Labour Courts of GNCTD wherein the said Labour Courts are duly integrated with the eCourts India website and the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) and all the data is available online for the litigants. He submits that as per the Zero Pendency Courts Project report, which is a pilot project undertaken by the High Court of Delhi, there were various steps which were suggested to be taken in respect of Labour Courts, however the CGIT does not specifically fall under the umbrella of Labour Court. He submits that the litigants before the CGIT are being prejudiced due to non-availability of adequate number of Benches, non-availability of order sheets and proceedings on a daily basis. Moreover, the judgments passed by the CGIT W.P.(C) 2595/2022 Page 3 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:12.02.2022 08:55:53 are not being uploaded in a timely manner. He also submits that the CGIT is grossly understaffed leading to enormous pendency, the data of which is not even available.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - Sabina - Full Document
1