Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.35 seconds)
The Mangement Of Express Publication ... vs Bangalore Newspaper Employees Union on 24 February, 2023
cites
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 25F in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Syndicate Bank vs General Secretary Syndicate Bank Staff ... on 25 April, 2000
In the case of Syndicate Bank (supra) the
Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering a case where the
employee was notified regarding the enquiry and since he
offered no explanation of his absence and did not report
for duty within 30 days, he was treated as voluntarily
having abandoned his services by placing reliance on a
clause in the bipartite settlement. In the said case, the
Tribunal held that the workman has not been served with
the notice and ordered his reinstatement subject to
certain conditions which order was upheld by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by the Division
Bench. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court set aside
41
the said order/judgment and upheld the order of dismissal
treating the workman as having voluntarily abandoned his
services.
The Management Of M/S Le Meridien ... vs M/S Karnataka Star Hotels Employees ... on 18 March, 2020
vii) The Management of M/s. Le Meridien
Bangalore v. The State of Karnataka and Ors.,
7
;
M/S. Scooters India Ltd vs M. Mohammad Yaqub & Anr on 21 November, 2000
In the case of Scooters India Ltd., (supra)
relied on by the learned Counsel for the workmen, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with a clause in the
Standing Orders which stipulated automatic termination of
the employment of the workman if he remains absent
from duty without leave, in excess of the period of leave
originally sanctioned or subsequently extended for more
than 10 days.
Jasmer Singh vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 13 January, 2015
36. The learned Counsel for the Respondents -
workmen has relied on the judgments in the case of
Director of Fisheries Terminal Dept., (supra), Dipali
Gundu Sarwate (supra), Jasmer Singh (supra),
Gaurishanker (supra) and Tapash Kumar Paul (supra)
in support of the proposition that termination of service of
workman without complying with Section 25F of the ID
Act is illegal. A detailed examination of the said
judgments are not necessary having regard to the findings
recorded herein.
Tapas Kumar Paul vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Ors on 17 May, 2017
36. The learned Counsel for the Respondents -
workmen has relied on the judgments in the case of
Director of Fisheries Terminal Dept., (supra), Dipali
Gundu Sarwate (supra), Jasmer Singh (supra),
Gaurishanker (supra) and Tapash Kumar Paul (supra)
in support of the proposition that termination of service of
workman without complying with Section 25F of the ID
Act is illegal. A detailed examination of the said
judgments are not necessary having regard to the findings
recorded herein.