Business Daily from THE HINDU group of publications
Saturday, Aug 23, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version | Audio

News
Features
Stocks
Cross Currency
Shipping
Archives
Google

Group Sites

Corporate - Courts/Legal Issues
States - Tamil Nadu
Labour court ‘can’t interfere’ if misconduct charge is proved: HC

Our Legal Correspondent

Chennai, Aug. 22 When a charge of misconduct of a workman was found to be proved, the award of the Labour Court granting relief of his reinstatement with 75 per cent back wages was not permissible, the Madras High Court has ruled.

Allowing a writ petition preferred by the management of Eveready Industries Ltd, Chennai, challenging the Labour Court, Chennai’s award dated August 26, 2002, Mr Justice K. Chandru set aside the award.

Quoting a recent judgment of the Supreme Court (in JK Synthetics Ltd vs KP Agraawal (2007(2) SCC 433), the judge said that the consistent view of the apex court was that in the absence of a finding that the punishment awarded to a workman was shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the charge established, the Labour Court should not interfere with the punishment.

In the light of several legal precedents and the Labour Court having found the workman guilty of rash behaviour and it denied 25 per cent back wages, this court was not inclined to entertain another writ petition by the workman praying for grant of the said 25 per cent back wages also.

In response to a petition by the workman, the Labour Court had earlier granted reinstatement with 75 per cent of back wages. The petitioner, Eveready Industries, submitted that two charges were levelled against the workman. First, he was charged about his questioning the authority disrespectfully for changing the shift of one workman. In the second charge, when he was shown some dust found in the industrial canteen, he abused the industrial relations officer.

The judge said that this was not a case where the Labour Court disbelieved the evidence against the workman. On the contrary, the court disagreed with the finding of the enquiry officer solely on the ground that there was no corroboration. Such a finding of the Labour Court was not warranted, the judge ruled.

While setting aside the award of the Labour Court, the High Court ruled that the amount already paid to the workman by way of interim order under Section 17-B of Industrial Disputes Act would not be recovered from him.

More Stories on : Courts/Legal Issues | Trade & Labour Unions | Tamil Nadu

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page




Stories in this Section
BSEL gets Malaysia contract


Labour court ‘can’t interfere’ if misconduct charge is proved: HC
Star may buy stake in Asianet; launches Bengali channel
Projects worth Rs 30,000 cr cleared in Karnataka
Nano suppliers also to pull out if Tatas shift from Singur
Singur plant project will continue, says Bengal Industry Minister
New Indica to be launched today
We may pull out of Singur if protests continue: Ratan Tata
Kanan Devan plans tea operations in Ethiopia
FIPB rejects Forum Synergies’ proposal
Competition Commission to have chairperson, 6 members soon
Partial lockout declared at Pricol unit
Hind Latex signs pacts with IL&FS, NNE Pharmaplan
GE Healthcare signs MoU with Gujarat Govt
Eicher, AB Volvo venture finalised
Lanco Infratech to foray into solar sector
BHPV to be made a centre for industrial boiler manufacture
ITC’s ‘holy smoke’ biz adds to the bottomline


Smartbuy



The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line