Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.71 seconds)M.P. State Electricity Board vs Smt. Jarina Bee on 15 July, 2003
Yet again in Jarina Bee (supra), this Court observed that the award of
full back wages was not the natural consequence of an order of
reinstatement.
Hindustan Steel Ltd vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, ... on 15 September, 1976
In M/s Hindustan Steel Ltd. (supra), this Court again did not lay down
any law. A finding of fact was arrived at by the Labour Court that the
Respondents had no alternative employment which was not challenged.
The only ground which was urged before the High Court was that the
Respondents had not proved that they had tried to mitigate their losses
during the period of unemployment. The questions which have been raised
herein had not been raised therein. The argument was confined only to
mitigation of the losses. This Court did not interfere with the discretionary
jurisdiction of the High Court in interfering with the award.
M/S. Nicks (India) Tools vs Ram Surat & Anr on 25 August, 2004
In Nicks (India) Tools (supra), this Court again in the fact situation
obtaining therein refused to interfere with the discretionary jurisdiction
exercised by the High Court particularly having regard to the fact that it was
for the first time before the writ court, such plea was raised by way of
additional evidence, which had been rejected.
Ram Ashrey Singh & Anr vs Ram Bux Singh & Ors on 11 February, 2003
In Ram Ashrey Singh Another vs. Ram Bux Singh and Others
[(2003) 9 SCC 154], questioning the order of termination after six year was
considered to be one of the factors for denying an order of reinstatement
with back wages to the workman. In the fact situation obtaining therein, it
was held that ends of justice would be sub-served if the Appellants therein
were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 35,000/- by way of compensation in
addition to what has already been paid.
Hindustan Motors Ltd vs Tapan Kumar Bhattacharya & Anr on 12 July, 2002
In Tapan Kumar Bhattacharya (supra), this Court noticed that there
was no pleading or evidence as to whether the Respondent therein was
employed elsewhere during the long interregnum, and in the fact situation
obtaining therein, the Appellant was directed to pay 50% of the back wages
till the date of reinstatement.
Haryana State Coop. Land Dev. Bank vs Neelam on 28 February, 2005
In Haryana State Coop. Land Dev. Bank Vs. Neelam [2005 (2)
SCALE 434], it was held :
Manager, R.B.I., Bangalore vs S. Mani & Ors on 14 March, 2005
[See also Manager, R.B.I., Bangalore Vs. S. Mani & Ors., 2005 (3)
SCALE 202]
Let us now consider the decisions cited by the ld. Counsel for the
Respondent No.1.
Hindustan Steel Works Construction ... vs Hindustan Steel Works Construction ... on 10 February, 1995
In Hindustan Tin Works (P) Ltd. v. Employees, a three-
Judge Bench of this Court laid down:
Mangt.Of M/S Sonepat Coop.Sugar Mills ... vs Ajit Singh on 14 February, 2005
[See also Management of M/s.
Sonepat Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. Ajit Singh 2005 (2) SCALE 151].
1