Dear All,
Could you please mention the 'Clause, Section, and sub-section of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for the termination of an employee for willful misconducts such as theft, violence, and insubordination, etc.
Thanks,
Khushal
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Could you please mention the 'Clause, Section, and sub-section of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for the termination of an employee for willful misconducts such as theft, violence, and insubordination, etc.
Thanks,
Khushal
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
While Section 33(2)(b) states that the employer can, for the misconduct of the workman, discharge or punish by way of dismissal or otherwise, the matter certainly shall not be connected to the pending dispute.
In order to exercise the powers of discharge or dismissal, the proviso to Section 33(2)(b) requires two conditions to be fulfilled. If the requirements are not satisfied, the management’s application is liable to be dismissed. In the case of Podar Mills Ltd. v. Bhagwan Singh and Anr., 1974, the appellant’s application for approval of dismissal was refused by the Tribunal on grounds of delay in making an application of approval; the Supreme Court upheld the judgment. The conditions are:
The concerned workmen should be paid wages for one month. These one-month wages include all prior wages plus the wages for the next month. The court viewed in Prabhakar H. Manjare v. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., 1998, where the application of approval was denied and held illegal as one month’s back wages were not paid. Conclusively, the appellant’s appeal was granted, restoring his services, and he was entitled to all consequential benefits.
The employer must make an application before the appropriate authority for approval of the action taken by the employer.
https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-33...%20one%20month.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
1153While Section 33(2)(b) states that the employer can, for the misconduct of the workman, discharge or punish by way of dismissal or otherwise, the matter certainly shall not be connected to the pending dispute.
In order to exercise the powers of discharge or dismissal, the proviso to Section 33(2)(b) requires two conditions to be fulfilled. If the requirements are not satisfied, the management’s application is liable to be dismissed. In the case of Podar Mills Ltd. v. Bhagwan Singh and Anr., 1974, the appellant’s application for approval of dismissal was refused by the Tribunal on grounds of delay in making an application of approval; the Supreme Court upheld the judgment. The conditions are:
The concerned workmen should be paid wages for one month. These one-month wages include all prior wages plus the wages for the next month. The court viewed in Prabhakar H. Manjare v. Indian Telephone Industries Ltd., 1998, where the application of approval was denied and held illegal as one month’s back wages were not paid. Conclusively, the appellant’s appeal was granted, restoring his services, and he was entitled to all consequential benefits.
The employer must make an application before the appropriate authority for approval of the action taken by the employer.
https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-33...%20one%20month.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think Mr. Khushal was asking about any provision in the ID Act for dismissing an employee for misconduct and not terminating a protected workman or a workman during the pendency of any disputes before the conciliation authority or labor court, as provided in Section 33.
If the employee is involved in any misconduct, you can terminate him after giving him an opportunity to defend the charges in an inquiry. For that, there is no need to refer to any provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The only thing to be noted is that before terminating, the employer should follow some principles of natural justice and give the delinquent employee sufficient opportunity to be heard.
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the employee is involved in any misconduct, you can terminate him after giving him an opportunity to defend the charges in an inquiry. For that, there is no need to refer to any provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The only thing to be noted is that before terminating, the employer should follow some principles of natural justice and give the delinquent employee sufficient opportunity to be heard.
From India, Kannur
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.
Circular No 1-2018 Processing of income-tax returns under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act .pdf
Non-compete Clause of Infy.jpg