One of our employees is guilty of serious misconduct. The labor court has awarded in favor of the management, and the employee has filed a writ petition.
Questions Regarding Legal Proceedings
Please let me know:
1. Can the High Court interfere with the judgment awarded by the labor court?
2. What is your advice in this case?
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
46Questions Regarding Legal Proceedings
Please let me know:
1. Can the High Court interfere with the judgment awarded by the labor court?
2. What is your advice in this case?
From India, Coimbatore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the decision of the 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 the Supreme Court.
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(3)Amend(0)
Dear friend,
Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can interfere with the awards passed by the Labour Court or Tribunal. Since the award passed by the Labour Court is not favorable 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
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court can interfere with the awards passed by the Labour Court or Tribunal. Since the award passed by the Labour Court is not favorable 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
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Hello Karthik,
At the outset, you have not given the facts of the case. By and large, Labour courts/Tribunals shall tilt towards workmen's side; in your case, it is otherwise. Apparently, there may be a blunder on the side of the workman. On a case-to-case basis, the Court/Tribunal shall deal with the cases. On merits, it awards the judgment. If any appeal is made by any aggrieved party, the High Court can interfere in the matter.
RAU
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
At the outset, you have not given the facts of the case. By and large, Labour courts/Tribunals shall tilt towards workmen's side; in your case, it is otherwise. Apparently, there may be a blunder on the side of the workman. On a case-to-case basis, the Court/Tribunal shall deal with the cases. On merits, it awards the judgment. If any appeal is made by any aggrieved party, the High Court can interfere in the matter.
RAU
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello All,
I agree with Mr. RV Subbarao for the reason that generally, labor courts/tribunals show a lot of favor to the workmen. Keeping in view the situations at the workplace generally does not favor a workman. However, there is no guarantee that a high court or even the Supreme Court will favor the workman if the evidence does not support him/her. The best course, I feel, is to sit with your learned lawyer and trusted friends/relatives and then decide whether approaching higher judiciary is going to be beneficial or not, and then take action. Impromptu decisions generally do not favor a workman in front of the judiciary.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I agree with Mr. RV Subbarao for the reason that generally, labor courts/tribunals show a lot of favor to the workmen. Keeping in view the situations at the workplace generally does not favor a workman. However, there is no guarantee that a high court or even the Supreme Court will favor the workman if the evidence does not support him/her. The best course, I feel, is to sit with your learned lawyer and trusted friends/relatives and then decide whether approaching higher judiciary is going to be beneficial or not, and then take action. Impromptu decisions generally do not favor a workman in front of the judiciary.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
With due respect to M/s Subba Rao and V.P.K, I wish to explain why I differ from their views posted in this thread regarding the alleged undue favor 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 favoring the claimant or the respondent rests on 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 types of cases, etc.
In my own experience as a conciliation officer under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, I had ample opportunity to peruse disciplinary files of dismissed workmen, perspicaciously analyze the stands taken by the employers to take the extreme action, and thoroughly observe the extent of compliance with 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 favorable 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 cannot 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 endeavor to be a 'model employer.' Who is to be blamed for this? Not individuals but the mindset 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 be accentuated by personal motives. That's why in our official circle it is said in a lighter vein, "A worst settlement is better than the best award!"
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
With due respect to M/s Subba Rao and V.P.K, I wish to explain why I differ from their views posted in this thread regarding the alleged undue favor 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 favoring the claimant or the respondent rests on 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 types of cases, etc.
In my own experience as a conciliation officer under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, I had ample opportunity to peruse disciplinary files of dismissed workmen, perspicaciously analyze the stands taken by the employers to take the extreme action, and thoroughly observe the extent of compliance with 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 favorable 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 cannot 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 endeavor to be a 'model employer.' Who is to be blamed for this? Not individuals but the mindset 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 be accentuated by personal motives. That's why in our official circle it is said in a lighter vein, "A worst settlement is better than the best award!"
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
While concurring with Mr. Umakanthan on the issue, 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. This means it can interfere with the orders passed by them if the Labour Court erred on a point of law or on questions of law, like misapplying a particular provision, or if there is victimization of the employee or violation of principles of natural justice - such as awarding a penalty disproportionate to the misconduct or omitting to follow any procedure/rule that would cause prejudice to the employee's defense or holding him guilty without 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 marshal your arguments supporting the Labour Court's ruling.
B. Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)
Amend(0)
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 marshal your arguments supporting the Labour Court's ruling.
B. Saikumar
Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(2)Amend(0)
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
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Mr. Umakanthan,
Good afternoon. I am a retired Colonel from the Indian Army (36 years+) and currently serving as the VP (Admin) in a Steel Manufacturing Factory. I am also a qualified Labour Lawyer (MLL&LW from ILS Law College, Pune) and have worked as the Manager of Security for six years at DRDO in Hyderabad and Pune. During my tenure as Manager of Security, I dealt with numerous labor problems and even granted a service break of 3 & 1/2 years to an employee and dismissed a senior office bearer of an all India level trade union for fraudulent cases personally against him. I can assure you that both parties approached high courts and lost the cases. What I am writing is based on the experience I have gained through the untiring pursuit of HR and Admin policies over time.
I do agree that, generally, management either doesn't pay attention to the application of correct rules and regulations or makes errors in judgments. Therefore, it is very essential to weigh all options before making judgments in such situations.
With warm wishes.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good afternoon. I am a retired Colonel from the Indian Army (36 years+) and currently serving as the VP (Admin) in a Steel Manufacturing Factory. I am also a qualified Labour Lawyer (MLL&LW from ILS Law College, Pune) and have worked as the Manager of Security for six years at DRDO in Hyderabad and Pune. During my tenure as Manager of Security, I dealt with numerous labor problems and even granted a service break of 3 & 1/2 years to an employee and dismissed a senior office bearer of an all India level trade union for fraudulent cases personally against him. I can assure you that both parties approached high courts and lost the cases. What I am writing is based on the experience I have gained through the untiring pursuit of HR and Admin policies over time.
I do agree that, generally, management either doesn't pay attention to the application of correct rules and regulations or makes errors in judgments. Therefore, it is very essential to weigh all options before making judgments in such situations.
With warm wishes.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Gratuity Madras High court Judgement[1].pd f