ArtiLib Article Library By Tag Author Index Submit Article Login Suggestions
Bookmark and Share

Supreme Court On EMPLOYEE-EMPLOYER RELATIONS

Land Mark Judgments of the decade On EMPLOYEE-EMPLOYER RELATIONS OF SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

By: madan lal pandia
Category: Legal
: LABOUR LAW
Posted: Jun 12, 2010
Updated: Jun 12, 2010
Views: 1323


E.S.I.
ESI’s contributions will be payable on the suspension allowance.
Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation v. Popular Automobiles, etc., 1997 LLR 1146
Managing Director of a Company will be covered under the Act.
E.S.I. Corporation v. Apex Engineering (P) Ltd., 1997 LLR 1097
A partner will not be covered under the Act.
E.S.I. Corporation v. Apex Engineering (P) Ltd., 1997 LLR 1097
ESI Corporation cannot approach EI court for resolving any difference or dispute with an employee.
E.S.I. Corporation v. F. Fiber Bangalore (P) Ltd., 1997 LLR 225: 1997-1 CLR 403
Amended provisions for recovery of ESI contributions will have retrospective effect.
Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 1997 LLR 991
An insured person for employment injury receives compensation or damages in a statute other than ESI Act since there is bar by section 53 of the Act.
Western India Plywood Ltd. v. Shri P. Ashokan, 1997 LLR1029
ESI cards not only should be duly stamped but must show due compliance of deposit of contribution.
Sovrin Knit Works, etc. v. E.S.I. Corporation & Anr., etc., 1997 LLR 197: 1997-II LLN 12
ESI Act will apply to a ‘shop’ or an establishment only when there are 20 eligible employees.
E.S.I. Corporation v. M/s. M.M. Suri & Associates (P) Ltd., 1998 LLR 1105: 1998 (80) FLR 839
The Directors of a company wil not be prosecuted for default in deposit of ESI’s contributions.
E.S.I. Corporation v. S.K. Aggarwal and Ors., 1998 LLR 806: 1998 (80) FLR 199
A notification issued by a State Government under the ESI Act will extend to all branches of the said establishment situated even outside the State.
Transport Corporation of India v. E.S.I. Corporation & Anr., 2000 LLR 113
Production incentives paid to the employees under Production Incentive Scheme in addition to normal wages when being paid quarterly i.e. exceeding two months will not be treated as ‘wages’ to attract the applicability of the ESI Act.
Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. E.S.I. Corporation, 2000 LLR 431
Different sales and service outlets will be clubbed for applicability of ESI Act even when none employed 10 or more employees.
Southern Agencies v. Andhra Pradesh E.S.I. Corporation, 2001 LLR 191
Equipment maintenance staff of a hospital will be covered under the ESI Act.
Christain Medical Colleg v. E.s.I. Corporation, 2001 LLR 60
An establishment providing consultancy services will be deemed as a ‘shop’ for coverage under the ESI Act.
Kirloskar Consultants Ltd. v. E.S.I. Corporation, 2001 LLR 57
A Cinema / Theatre will be covered under ESI Act when there are 20 employees inclusive of contractor’s employees.
Saraswath Films v. Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation, Trichur, 2002 LLR 930
Non-payment of contributions will not affect the availing of ESI benefits by an employee.
Bharagath Engineering v. R. Ranganayaki & Anr., 2003 LLR 227
Interim relief amount paid under instructions from Govt. would be wages for ESI purpose.
Employees' State Insurance Corporation vs Gnanambigai Mills Ltd. 2005 LLR 905
ESI medical service is covered under consumer protection Act.
Chairman, Employees’ State Insurance Corporation. 2007 LLR 740
Toddy “shop” is liable to be covered under ESI Act.
Bhaskaran vs. Asst. Director, Employees’ State Insurance Corporation. 2007 LLR 1061
K.R. Anitha & Ors. v. Regional Director, E.S.I. Corporation & Anr., 2003 LLR 1075: 2003 (99) FLR 341
WORKMAN
A doctor who has been paid on daily basis for the visits to the Dental Clinic of the Corporation will not be a ‘workman’ under the Act.
Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn. v. Virendra Kumar Jayantibhai Patel, 1997 (77) FLR 201
An apprentice having worked for a short period could not be considered a ‘workman’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Factory Manager, CIMMCO Wagon Factory etc v. Virendra Kumar Sharma & Anr., etc., 2000 LLR 1137
The workmen of a cooperative canteen run for staff of a bank with its funds will be employees of the bank.
Indian Oversease Bank v. I.O.B. Staff Canteen Workers Union & Anr., 2000 LLR 647
Canteen employees will not be deemed to be bank employees when running of canteen is not obligatory.
State Bank of India & Ors. v. State Bank of India Canteen Employees’ Union (Bengal Circle) & Ors., 2000 LLR 675
Whether an employee is a workman or not should be decided at the thresh-hold.
Hussan Mithu Mhasvadkar v. Bombay Iron & Steel Labour Board, 2001 LLR 1083
An inspector will also be a ‘workman’ under Industrial Disputes Act.
Hussan Mithu Mhasvadkar v. Bombay Iron & Steel Labour Board, 2001 LLR 1083
Deposit collectors engaged by banks against commission will be ‘workmen’ under the Industrial Disputes Act.
Indian Bank Association v. Workmen of Syndicate Bank & Ors., 2001 LLR(Sum) 412
An Artist engaged in production of drama or theatre will not be a ‘workman’.
Bharat Bhawan Trust v. Bharat Bhawan Artists Association, 2001 LLR 1058
Designation of an employee will not determine as to whether he is a workman.
Hussan Mithu Mhasvadkar v. Bombay Iron & Steel Labour Board, 2001 LLR 1083
Nature of duties and not the designation will determine whether an employee is a ‘workman’ or not.
Sharad Kumar v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors., 2002 LLR 545: 2002 LIC 1464: AIR 2002(SC) 1724:2002 (97) DLT 326:2002 (100) FJR 852
It is the workman, who has to prove his employment with the employer. Surendranagar Distt.
Panchayat & Anr. vs. Gangaben Laljibahi & Ors. 2006 LLR 887
T.V. Service Engineers engaged on contract basis will not be workman under I.D. Act.
Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Electronics Corporation of India Service Engineer Union. LLR 1045
For Exclusion of an employee for being a workman under I.D. Act, It is necessary that some persons must be working under him.
Anand Regional Co-op. Oil Seedsgrowers Union Ltd. vs. Shailesh Kumar Harshadbhai Shah 2006 LLR 1052
It is for the workman to prove that he has worked for morethan 240 days in preceding one year.
Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. vs. Mohammed Rafi. 2006 LLR 1080
Employees engaged and continued for years together cannot be termed as temporary or casuals.
Mineral Exploration Corporation Employees’ Union vs. Mineral Exploration Corporation Ltd. & Anr. 2006 III CLR 956
Legal Asst. Is not a workman under U.P.I.D. Act.
Muir Mills Unit of N.T.c. (U.P.) Ltd. vs. Swayam Prakash Srivastava and another. 2007 (112) FLR 865
Industrial Relations Executive is not a workman under I.D. Act. amendment in sec. 2(s) of the Act has to be read prospective and not retrospective.
C. Gupta v. Glaxo Smith Klin Pharmaceutical Limited. 2007 CLR 836, 2007 (114) FLR 585
MISCELLANEOUS
The Supreme Court in a Special Leave to appeal can correct the incorrect decision of the High Courts.
Western India Plywood Ltd. v. Shri P. Ashokan, 1997 LLR 1029
Employees retiring before the final decision of increase in the retirement age will not be entitled to the benefits.
J.&K. State Road Transport Corpn., Jammu & Anr. v. Im Prakash & Ors., 1998 LLR 883
Civil Court will not entertain a suit pertaining to termination of an employee.
Ashok Kumar Srivastav v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 1998 LLR 517
A contract of employment cannot be enforced by the Civil Court.
Ashok Kumar Srivastav v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors., 1998 LLR 517
Strike notice under section 24 of MRTU & PULP Act need to be in Form No. 1
Savita Chemicals (P) Ltd. v. Dyes & Chemicals Workers Union & Anr., 1999 LLR 188
Extreme step of strike by workers without availing remedy under section 28 of MRTU & PULP Act would not render the strike invalid unless it falls within the purview of section 25(1)(i) of the Act.
Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Maharashtra General Kamgar Union & Ors., 1999 LLR 188
Simple discharge of a workman under MRTU & PULP Act also will amount to unfair labour practice.
Lokmat Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. v. Shankaraprasad, 1999 LLR 849 (SC): 1999(3) LLN 538
When the award of the Labour Court is capricious, the High Court must exercise its jurisdiction.
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Subhash Chandra Sharma & Ors., 2000 LLR 461
High Court is empowered to modify the disproportionate punishment.
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. v. Mahesh Kumar Mishra & Ors., 2000 LLR 459
High Court cannot grant permanent status to a daily wager indirectly which was not possible to do directly when there are no posts.
Mahatma Phule Agricultural University and Ors. v. Nasik Zilla Sheth Kamgar Union and Ors., 2001 LLR 904
Courtsey : Labour Law Reporter, FLR, CLR & APS Labour Digest

Contact Author




Disclaimer: Article submitters are solely responsible for the content of their articles.
ArtiLib can't be held liable for the contents of the articles.   Report Abuse

Browse By Category
Contact ArtiLib| Privacy Policy| Terms of Service