Labour & Service
Bank Can't Withhold Superannuation Benefits Explicitly Granted In Removal Order Despite Ongoing Service Dispute:MP High Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench comprising Justice Sunita Yadav and Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke partially allowed a writ appeal challenging the Single Judge's order that had directed the appellant to raise an industrial dispute regarding his superannuation benefits. The Court held that when a removal order explicitly grants superannuation benefits, these cannot be...
Acceptance Of Qualifications At Time Of Appointment Can't be Questioned After 30 Years, Unless Fraud Is Alleged:MP High Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Vivek Jain partially allowed a writ petition challenging an inquiry into a disability certificate submitted for employment three decades ago. The court held that while authorities can investigate allegations of forgery, they cannot question the acceptability of qualifications that were accepted at the time of appointment after...
Prior Period Service Must Count Towards ACP/MACP Benefits For Absorbed Employees: Patna High Court.
Patna High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Harish Kumar directed the State of Bihar to count the petitioner's prior service period before retrenchment for granting Assured Career Progression (ACP) and Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) benefits. It held that the principles applicable to fresh appointments do not apply to cases of absorption of...
UGC Ph.D. Requirement For Promotions In Maharashtra Colleges Can't Be Applied Retrospectively: Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench: A division bench of Justices Mangesh S. Patil and Shailesh P. Brahme ruled that the University Grants Commission (UGC) Ph.D. requirement for promotion to Associate Professor, introduced in 2018, applies prospectively and does not impact faculty who qualified under earlier regulations. The State of Maharashtra was directed to review the...
Supreme Court Validates Different Grade Pay For Artificers III To I; Promotional Hierarchy Justifies Pay Distinction In Navy's Pay Grade
Supreme Court of India: A Division Bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan dismissed appeals challenging the Armed Forces Tribunal's order regarding grade pay disparity between Navy Artificers and Chief Petty Officers. The Court held that despite equivalence in seniority ranking, the difference in grade pay was justified due to the promotional hierarchy within...
Courts Can't Direct Promotions Outside Established Rules And Seniority Framework: Madras HC
Madras High Court: The Court held that a Water Pump Operator's promotion to Sanitary Supervisor and subsequent reversion must be evaluated within the framework of the Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Establishment Rules. Since the position of Water Pump Operator (that the petitioner undertakes) is not among the designated feeder posts (Public Health Workers, Sanitary Workers, or Scavengers)...
Indefinite Probation Extension Beyond Regulatory Limits Invalid; Bombay HC Reinforces Procedural Safeguards
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench comprising Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice M.M. Sathaye ruled that Mumbai Port Authority's (MbPA) termination of a Chief Law Officer's probation based on an internal inquiry report without due process was stigmatic and unjustified. The Court found that the indefinite extension of probation violated the Mumbai Port Trust Employees Regulations,...
Non-Speaking Dismissal Orders And Procedural Lapses In Disciplinary Proceedings Violate Natural Justice: MP HC
Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi invalidated the dismissal of a Bhopal Development Authority (BDA) employee, finding significant violations of natural justice principles. The court held that the disciplinary proceedings against Vijay Singh Yadav were fundamentally flawed due to the absence of witness testimony, failure to provide essential...
Arbitrary Downgrading Of Military CRs Without Cogent Reasoning Violates Procedural Guidelines: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur partially allowed a petition challenging biased Confidential Reports (CRs) of an Army officer. The court found that the downgrading of Brigadier Gopal Mohan Atri's ratings by superior officers was arbitrary and inconsistent with his service record. Emphasizing the need for objective...
Industrial Court Lacks Jurisdiction In Absence Of Clear Employer-Employee Relationship: Bombay HC
Bombay High Court: A single Judge bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne allowed Tata Steel's writ petition. It held that the Industrial Court lacked jurisdiction to decide the employment status of canteen workers, as the nature of the employer-employee relationship was itself disputed. The court ruled that under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair...
Termination Without Section 25F Notice; Monetary Compensation Adequate When Employee Found In Similar Employment: Bombay HC
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Anil L. Pansare upheld the Labour Court's decision to award monetary compensation instead of reinstatement to a casual laborer whose services were terminated without following due process. The court emphasized that while termination without following Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is illegal, reinstatement is not...
Principal Employer Can't Escape Liability Under EC Act By Claiming Workers Were Through Contractor: Bombay HC
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh dismissed Air India Charters Ltd.'s appeal against compensation awarded to a deceased pilot's dependents. The Court held that under Section 12 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, the principal employer bears primary liability for compensation even when workers are engaged through contractors. The Court...












