Labour Law

Supreme Court settles the validity of Industrial Dispute reference after workers’ admission as contract labourers: Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (2008)

/ Arijit Pasayat, Contract Labor, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 10, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 7-A, Judges, Mukundakam Sharma, Regularization of Contract Labor, Sham Agreements

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 25, 2008 The Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether an industrial dispute referred by the Government of West Bengal under Section 7-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, was valid, especially when the workers had previously acknowledged their status as contract laborers. The core issue revolves […]

Supreme Court settles the validity of Industrial Dispute reference after workers’ admission as contract labourers: Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles Re-Deployment Policy for Retrenched Employees in Labour Law: K. Alex vs. Delhi State Mineral Dev. Corpn. (23 September 2008)

/ Central Civil Services Rules, Central Civil Services Rules with Rule 5, Constitutional Law, Harjit Singh Bedi, Judges, Labour Law, Re-Deployment Policy, Right to Equality, Tarun Chatterjee, Termination of Service

Date of the Judgment: 23 September 2008 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5797 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 14337 of 2006) Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J., Harjit Singh Bedi, J. Can an employer selectively deny re-deployment to a retrenched employee when a company policy mandates it? The Supreme Court of India, in K. Alex

Supreme Court settles Re-Deployment Policy for Retrenched Employees in Labour Law: K. Alex vs. Delhi State Mineral Dev. Corpn. (23 September 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies subsistence allowance during suspension when CBI investigates: Punjab National Bank vs. Bernard Lakra (2008)

/ Awards and Settlements, Departmental Enquiry, Desai Award, Industrial Disputes Act, Judges, Lokeshwar Singh Panta, R.V. Raveendran, Sastry Award, Service Law, Subsistence Allowance, Suspension

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 18, 2008 Judges: Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta When an employee is suspended pending investigation, how much subsistence allowance are they entitled to? The Supreme Court in Punjab National Bank & Anr. vs. Bernard Lakra addressed a dispute regarding the appropriate subsistence allowance for an employee

Supreme Court clarifies subsistence allowance during suspension when CBI investigates: Punjab National Bank vs. Bernard Lakra (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008)

/ Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33-C(2), Judges, P. Sathasivam, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 10, Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 2(11), Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 with Section 8

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 5, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J. Can daily wage employees claim statutory bonus through an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a batch of appeals concerning the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board’s denial of

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles applicability of Sections 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act to daily-wage employees: Jaipur Development Authority vs. Ram Sahai & Anr. (2006)

/ Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25G, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25H, Judges, Labour Law, Markandey Katju, Re-employment, Retrenchment, S.B. Sinha

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 31st October 2006 Citation: [2006] INSC 514 Judges: S.B. Sinha and Markandey Katju When a worker is hired on a daily-wage basis, are they entitled to the same protections as permanent employees if their services are terminated? The Supreme Court of India addressed this issue in a case involving the

Supreme Court settles applicability of Sections 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act to daily-wage employees: Jaipur Development Authority vs. Ram Sahai & Anr. (2006) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Threatening Behavior in Industrial Dispute: M/S. Amrit Vanaspati Co. Ltd. vs. Khem Chand & Anr. (12 July 2006)

/ AR. Lakshmanan, Industrial Dispute, Judges, Labour Law, Lokeshwar Singh Panta, U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 11A

Can threatening a coworker with violence justify dismissal from a job? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a case involving an employee accused of threatening to throw coworkers into a boiler. This judgment clarifies the extent to which employers can take disciplinary action against employees for misconduct and the role of

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Threatening Behavior in Industrial Dispute: M/S. Amrit Vanaspati Co. Ltd. vs. Khem Chand & Anr. (12 July 2006) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles maintainability of civil suits in labour disputes: B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited (25 August 2004)

/ A.K. Mathur, Civil Suits, Industrial Disputes, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2-A, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(k), Judges, Labour Law, N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha, Termination of Employment

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 25 August 2004 Judges: N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha, A.K. Mathur When can an employee bypass industrial dispute mechanisms and directly file a civil suit against their employer? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited, a case concerning the termination of

Supreme Court settles maintainability of civil suits in labour disputes: B.S. Bharti vs. I.B.P. Company Limited (25 August 2004) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the definition of ‘industry’ under Industrial Disputes Act: Bangalore Water Supply vs. A. Rajappa (1978) INSC 298 (21 February 1978)

/ A.D. Koshal, D.A. Desai, Definition of Industry, Employee Rights, Industrial Disputes, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(j), Jaswant Singh, Judges, Labor Law, O. Chinnappa Reddy, P.N. Shinghal, R.S. Pathak, V.R. Krishna Iyer

Date of the Judgment: 21 February 1978 Citation: 1978 INSC 298 Judges: Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, Justice D.A. Desai, Justice R.S. Pathak, Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, Justice A.D. Koshal, Justice P.N. Shinghal, Justice Jaswant Singh What constitutes an ‘industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? This question has been a subject of extensive legal debate.

Supreme Court clarifies the definition of ‘industry’ under Industrial Disputes Act: Bangalore Water Supply vs. A. Rajappa (1978) INSC 298 (21 February 1978) Read Post »

Scroll to Top