One of our employee guilty of serious misconduct, the labor court has given award in favour of the Management , the employee has filed a writ petition ,
Please let me know
1.High court can interference judgment award by labor court ?
2. your advice in this case
From India, Coimbatore
46Please let me know
1.High court can interference judgment award by labor court ?
2. your advice in this case
From India, Coimbatore
If the decision of Labour Court is unfair, naturally, the High Court can interfere. The employee (aggrieved) may not be satisfied with the decision of the Labour Court and that is why he has filed the writ before the High Court. It may even go up to Supreme Court.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Dear friend,
(1) Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can interfere with the awards passed by the Labour Court or Tribunal.
(2) Since the award passed by the Labour Court is not favourable to the workman only, just enter appearance through a pleader only when notice from the Court is received and he will guide you further.
From India, Salem
(1) Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can interfere with the awards passed by the Labour Court or Tribunal.
(2) Since the award passed by the Labour Court is not favourable to the workman only, just enter appearance through a pleader only when notice from the Court is received and he will guide you further.
From India, Salem
Hello Karthik,
At the outset you have not given the facts of the case.
By and large Labour courts/ Tribunals shall tilt towards Workmens' side; in your case it is otherwise.
Apparently there may be blunder on the side of the workman. On case to case basis Court / Tribunal shall deal the cases.
On merits it awards the judgment , if any appeal is made by any aggrieved party High Court can interfere in the matter.
RAU
From India, Mumbai
At the outset you have not given the facts of the case.
By and large Labour courts/ Tribunals shall tilt towards Workmens' side; in your case it is otherwise.
Apparently there may be blunder on the side of the workman. On case to case basis Court / Tribunal shall deal the cases.
On merits it awards the judgment , if any appeal is made by any aggrieved party High Court can interfere in the matter.
RAU
From India, Mumbai
Hello All,
I agree Mr RV Subbarao for the reason that generally labour courts/tribunals show lot of favour to the workmen keeping in view the situations at workplace generally donot favour a workman. However there is no gaurantee that a high court or even supreme court will favour the workman if the evidance does not favour him/her. The best course I feel is to sit with your learned lawyer and trusted friends / relatives and then decide whether to approach higher judiciary is going to be benefecial or not and then take actions. Impromptu decisions generally donot favour a workman infront of judiciay.
From India, Pune
I agree Mr RV Subbarao for the reason that generally labour courts/tribunals show lot of favour to the workmen keeping in view the situations at workplace generally donot favour a workman. However there is no gaurantee that a high court or even supreme court will favour the workman if the evidance does not favour him/her. The best course I feel is to sit with your learned lawyer and trusted friends / relatives and then decide whether to approach higher judiciary is going to be benefecial or not and then take actions. Impromptu decisions generally donot favour a workman infront of judiciay.
From India, Pune
Dear friends,
With due respect to M/s Subba Rao and V.P.K, just I wish to explain why I differ from their views posted in this thread regarding the alleged undue favour shown to the workmen generally by Labour Courts.First and foremost, it is not true.Basically an industrial dispute before a Labour Court is in no way different from a civil litigation pending before any other adjudicatory forum.Therefore, the success of the case favouring the claimant or the respondent, rests on so many factors like the sustainability of the claim, the antecedent events that lead to the cause of action leading to the litigation, the proportionality of the punishment to the misconduct, the effectiveness of the arguments advanced before the Court, the previous judicial pronouncements in similar type of cases etc,.In my own experience as a conciliation officer under the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, I had the ample opportunity to peruse disciplinary files of dismissed workmen, perspicaciously analyze the the stands taken by the employers to take the extreme action and to thoroughly observe the extent of compliance of the provisions of the Acts and Rules applicable.I am very sorry that in a vast majority of the cases in which the workmen got favourable awards later, the employers had misled themselves either by their vindictive attitude or by the haphazard way of handling disciplinary proceedings apart from willful non observance of Acts and Rules.We can not simply brush aside the ground reality of workmen not even of private enterprises but of large public sector undertakings lamenting as casual workmen for 25 years or more though the Supreme Court in its wisdom has been repeatedly advising that the State should endeavour to be a 'model employer'.Who is to be blamed for this? Not individuals but the mind-set corroded with exploitative tendencies and callousness towards the sufferings of the people in the lower rung.So it is my personal opinion that before inflicting a punishment on a workman or denying a right or a concession to the workmen the employer should guide himself with prudence and not accentuated by personal motives.That's why in our official circle it is said in lighter vein " A worst settlement is better than the best award!"
From India, Salem
With due respect to M/s Subba Rao and V.P.K, just I wish to explain why I differ from their views posted in this thread regarding the alleged undue favour shown to the workmen generally by Labour Courts.First and foremost, it is not true.Basically an industrial dispute before a Labour Court is in no way different from a civil litigation pending before any other adjudicatory forum.Therefore, the success of the case favouring the claimant or the respondent, rests on so many factors like the sustainability of the claim, the antecedent events that lead to the cause of action leading to the litigation, the proportionality of the punishment to the misconduct, the effectiveness of the arguments advanced before the Court, the previous judicial pronouncements in similar type of cases etc,.In my own experience as a conciliation officer under the Industrial Disputes Act,1947, I had the ample opportunity to peruse disciplinary files of dismissed workmen, perspicaciously analyze the the stands taken by the employers to take the extreme action and to thoroughly observe the extent of compliance of the provisions of the Acts and Rules applicable.I am very sorry that in a vast majority of the cases in which the workmen got favourable awards later, the employers had misled themselves either by their vindictive attitude or by the haphazard way of handling disciplinary proceedings apart from willful non observance of Acts and Rules.We can not simply brush aside the ground reality of workmen not even of private enterprises but of large public sector undertakings lamenting as casual workmen for 25 years or more though the Supreme Court in its wisdom has been repeatedly advising that the State should endeavour to be a 'model employer'.Who is to be blamed for this? Not individuals but the mind-set corroded with exploitative tendencies and callousness towards the sufferings of the people in the lower rung.So it is my personal opinion that before inflicting a punishment on a workman or denying a right or a concession to the workmen the employer should guide himself with prudence and not accentuated by personal motives.That's why in our official circle it is said in lighter vein " A worst settlement is better than the best award!"
From India, Salem
While concurring with Mr.Umakanthan on the isue, I just would like to add that the High Court's writ jurisdiction under Art.226 is limited to judicial review of the decisions taken by the lower courts which means it can interfere with the orders passed by them if the labour Court erred on point of law or on questions of law like misapplying a particular provision or if there is victimisation of th emloyee or violation of principles of natural jutice like awarding a penalty dispropritionate to the misconduct or omitting to follow any procedure/rule which would cause prejudice to employee' defence or holding him guilty without a corroborative evidence etc. If the enquiry is just ,fair and proper and the misconduct is established on the basis of sustainable evidence, the HIgh Court will not interfere with the orders passed by Disciplinary authorities.You need to oppose the grounds of the employee in the writ and marshall your arguments supporting the Lab.Court's ruling.
B.Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
B.Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
dear the labour court judgement can challenged in high court and high court judgment can challenged in supreme court by the defending party. there is no law to stop the same thanks
From India, New Delhi
From India, New Delhi
Dear Sir You have not jot down the actual misconduct. But If any aggreived party apply to high court. High court may intervene. Regards Govind Pawar AM-Industrial Relations
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr Umakanthan.M,
Good afternoon. I am a retired Col from Indian Army (36 years +) and at present serving as VP (Admin) in a Steel Manufacturing Factory. I am also a qualified Labour Lawyer (MLL&LW from ILS Law College, Pune) and has worked as Manager Security for six years in DRDO at Hyderabad and Pune. During my tenure as Manager Security I dealt with lots of labour problems and even got a service break of 3 & 1/2 years to an employee and dismissed a senoir office bearer of an all India level trade union for fradulant cases personally against him. I can assure you that both parties approached high courts and lost the cases. What I am writing is from the experience that I have gained through untiring pursuing of HR and Admin policies over a period of time.
I do agree that generally management either doesn't pay attention to application of correct rules and regulations or pass err judgements. Therefore it is very essential to weigh all options before passing your judgements in such situations.
With warm wishes.
From India, Pune
Good afternoon. I am a retired Col from Indian Army (36 years +) and at present serving as VP (Admin) in a Steel Manufacturing Factory. I am also a qualified Labour Lawyer (MLL&LW from ILS Law College, Pune) and has worked as Manager Security for six years in DRDO at Hyderabad and Pune. During my tenure as Manager Security I dealt with lots of labour problems and even got a service break of 3 & 1/2 years to an employee and dismissed a senoir office bearer of an all India level trade union for fradulant cases personally against him. I can assure you that both parties approached high courts and lost the cases. What I am writing is from the experience that I have gained through untiring pursuing of HR and Admin policies over a period of time.
I do agree that generally management either doesn't pay attention to application of correct rules and regulations or pass err judgements. Therefore it is very essential to weigh all options before passing your judgements in such situations.
With warm wishes.
From India, Pune
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Delhi high court judgment.pdf