Dear All,
Please suggest, one of our colleagues was terminated from the college in Noida due to unauthorized leave of 4 days. The company terminated him on the spot and denied paying any notice period amount without conducting any domestic inquiry.
A strange thing happened when the Noida Labour Office inspector stated that he had informed the matter to our company and suggested filing a civil case. However, the inspector did not conduct any inquiry, no notice was sent to the company, and there has been no hearing to date. It has been almost 3 months, and nothing has progressed.
Please suggest the next course of action, as no one seems willing to help in this labor court case. Should we pursue the civil court route, or can we take some action against the inspector?
Thank you.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Please suggest, one of our colleagues was terminated from the college in Noida due to unauthorized leave of 4 days. The company terminated him on the spot and denied paying any notice period amount without conducting any domestic inquiry.
A strange thing happened when the Noida Labour Office inspector stated that he had informed the matter to our company and suggested filing a civil case. However, the inspector did not conduct any inquiry, no notice was sent to the company, and there has been no hearing to date. It has been almost 3 months, and nothing has progressed.
Please suggest the next course of action, as no one seems willing to help in this labor court case. Should we pursue the civil court route, or can we take some action against the inspector?
Thank you.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Straight dismissal for an unauthorized absence of 4 days is certainly a disproportionate punishment, whether the delinquent is a workman under the ID Act, 1947, or not. However, the recourse to remedy differs accordingly.
You could have mentioned the post and its position held by your former colleague. Ex facie, the Labor Officer's suggestion may be based on the fact that your friend was employed in a supervisory capacity with a salary of more than Rs. 10,000 per month or in a managerial cadre. In that case, his suggestion is correct.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
6185You could have mentioned the post and its position held by your former colleague. Ex facie, the Labor Officer's suggestion may be based on the fact that your friend was employed in a supervisory capacity with a salary of more than Rs. 10,000 per month or in a managerial cadre. In that case, his suggestion is correct.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Sir, He is a workmen as per ID act. How can labour inspector close the case without a single hearing now he is saying that pl hire a advocate I can not do anything. Pl suggest on the same.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If your contention is that the affected individual is a workman under the ID Act, 1947, he can raise a dispute under Section 2-A (1) of the ID Act, 1947, before the area conciliation officer (L.O. or A.L.C., as the case may be). In these proceedings, the appearance of a lawyer is prohibited. Upon receipt of the Conciliation Officer's failure report or after the expiry of 45 days, whichever is earlier, he can file a dispute under Section 2-A (2) before the Labor Court.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
Bahrain labour law 2012 - 15052013.pdf
Emergence of Labour Law.doc
Labour Law- PPT.ppt