Labour Law

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

— S. 11-A — Power and duty of Labour Court to permit the parties to adduce evidence — Where dismissal order is passed without holding an enquiry or after holding a defective enquiry, held, Labour Court has, in order to satisfy itself about the legality of the order, to give an opportunity to the employer and employee to adduce evidence before it, (2006) 6 SCC 325-A

Constitution of India

— Art. 226 — Scope of judicial review/ Interference under Art. 226 — Labour/Service matters — Labour matters — Scope of judicial review of award of Tribunal — High Court while exercising powers under writ jurisdiction, held, cannot deal with the sufficiency of the punishment inflicted by the management on a workman for a particular misconduct nor can it interfere with the factual findings of the Labour Court — Hence, where the Labour Court on evidence found the charges to have been proved and upheld the order of dismissal, High Court erred in interfering therewith, (2006) 6 SCC 325-B

Labour Law

Dismissal

— Relief — Factors warranting leniency, dismissal although justified — Labour Court upholding the order of dismissal for misconduct — Unit concerned closed by them — High Court erroneously reversing the order of Labour Court and directing payment of 75% back wages till the date of superannuation or closure of the unit along with closure compensation — However, the dismissal order having been passed 20 long years prior to the age of superannuation and the dismissed workman having remained unemployed and without any income during that period — In such circumstances, although Labour Court's order (upholding the dismissal) found to be proper, management directed to pay Rs 1,25,000 in settlement of all the claims and counterclaims of the parties albeit without prejudice to the workman's right to provident fund amount (including the management's contribution thereto) together with interest, (2006) 6 SCC 325-C