Dismissed

M/S Principal Meenakshi Public School v. Po, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Feb 2012LPA/198/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act applies regardless of whether the appointment was temporary, permanent, or ad-hoc. The nature of appointment or lack of advertisement does not exempt a non-public sector employer from statutory termination procedures. The Appeal was dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/S Principal Meenakshi Public… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Date of decision: 6.2.2012 LPA No. 198 of 2012 (O&M)

¶3

M/s Principal Meenakshi Public School

¶4

.....Appellant

¶5

vs.

¶6

Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court & Another

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

Present: - Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the appellant.

¶9

CORAM: -HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

¶10

HEMANT GUPTA, J

¶11

CM No. 481 of 2012

¶12

Exemption is allowed as prayed for.

¶13

CM No. 483 of 2012

¶14

For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay of 79 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶15

CM No.482 of 2012

¶16

Application is allowed. Delay of 856 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned.

¶17

LPA No. 198 of 2012

¶18

Challenge in the present appeal is to an order passed by learned Single Judge of this Court on 5.3.2009, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner, challenging the Award passed by Industrial Tribunal, Gurgaon dated 18.4.2006, directing re-instatement of workman for 40% back wages remained unsuccessful.

¶19

Learned Single Judge has recorded a finding that the services of the workman were terminated without complying

¶20

LPA No. 198 of 2012

¶21

with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short the 'Act'), therefore, the workman is entitled to reinstatement.

¶22

The only argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that the workman was appointed without due process of appointment and therefore, the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act will not be applicable.

¶23

We do not find any merit in such argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant. The nature of appointment whether it is temporary, permanent or adhoc, is not relevant to determine the applicability of Section 25-F of the Act. Therefore, even if the workman was appointed without any advertisement, that will not confer any right in the management to terminate the services of the workman without complying with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act. It may be noticed that the appellant is not an establishment in public sector. Therefore, the requirement of publication of an advertisement may not be strictly applicable in the facts of the present case.

Dismissed.

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

(A.N.JINDAL) JUDGE

6.2.2012 preeti

M/S Principal Meenakshi Public School v. Po, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S Principal Meenakshi Public School v. Po, Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Bijay Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Trilok Chand Arora Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Prem Chand & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mohinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sagar Mann Vs State of Haryana