Labour & Service Weekly Round-Up: 6th May to 12th May 2024

Delhi High Court Departmental Enquiry Cannot Be Dispensed With Based On Presumption That Accused Police Personnel Would Threaten Witnesses: Delhi High Court Case No.- W.P.(C) 5562/2024, CAV 181/2024, CM APPL. 22929/2024 -Stay. CM APPL. 22930/2024 -Ex./LLOD Case Name- Commissioner of Police & Ors vs Sant Ram A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Commissioner of Police & Ors vs Sant Ram has held that enquiry cannot be dispensed with only on the basis of a perceived notion that the accused being a police personnel would threaten the witnesses and holding of an enquiry would cause trauma to the complainant. Termination Order Based On Enquiry For Misconduct Behind The Back Of The Officer Is Violative Of PNJ: Delhi HCCase No.- W.P.(C) 12696/2023 Case Name- Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors vs Virender A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors vs Virender has held that a termination order which is based on the report of an inquiry in which misconduct of a definite nature was arrived at behind the back of the officer is violative of principles of natural justice. Bombay High Court Compassionate Appointment Can Only Be Claimed in Accordance with the Existing Policy And Not As A Matter Of Right: Bombay HC Case: Sau. Asha wd/o Haridas Katwale & Ors. v. The Manager (Mines), M/s Wester Coalfields Ltd. Bhadrawati & Ors Case No. W.P. No. 7361/2023 A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice Avinash G. Gharote and Justice. M.S. Jawalkar while deciding a writ petition in the case of Sau. Asha wd/o Haridas Katwale & Ors. v. The Manager (Mines), M/s Wester Coalfields Ltd. Bhadrawati & Ors. has held that compassionate appointment can only be claimed in accordance with the existing policy and not as a matter of right Court Cannot Interpret Conditions Of Advertisement Contrary To Plain Language Of The Same: Bombay High CourtCase No.- CWP No. 7650 of 2023 Case Name- Ashok Mallinath Halsangi & Ors v State of Maharashtra & Ors A Division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice A.S. Chandurkar and Justice Jitendra Jain while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Ashok Mallinath Halsangi & Ors vs State of Maharashtra & Ors has held that the court in the garb of judicial review cannot sit in the chair of appointing authority to decide what is best for the employer and interpret the conditions of the advertisement contrary to the plain language of the same. Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Excess Payment To Employee On Ground Of Erroneous Pay Scale, Cannot Be Made At End Of Service: Calcutta High Court Case No. : WPO No.1586 of 2023 Case Name : Badal Kumar Mandal vs. Chairman Indian Museum Board Of Trust And Ors. A single judge bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising of Hon'ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha, while deciding Writ Petition in the case of Badal Kumar Mandal vs. Chairman Indian Museum Board Of Trust And Ors., held that irrespective of whether the upgradation of pay scale and posts is made contrary to law, recovery of any excess payment received by the employee on the ground of such revision cannot be made either at the end of the service of the employee or thereafter. Tribunal Order On Legality Of Domestic Enquiry Can Be Challenged Without Waiting For Final Order : Calcutta High CourtCase No.- WPA 9360 of 2024 Case Name- CSB Bank Ltd vs UOI & Anr. A single judge bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising of Justice Arindam Mukherjee while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of CSB Bank Ltd vs UOI & Anr. has held that an order of a Tribunal can be challenged in a writ petition without waiting for the final order on ground of being in excess of jurisdiction. Allahabad High Court Entitlement To Gratuity Not Dependent On Retirement Age But Number Of Years Of Service : Allahabad High Court Case Title: Sehrun Nisha v. State Of Up And 3 Others [WRIT - A No. - 6402 of 2024] The Allahabad High Court has held that gratuity would be payable to a government employee based on his years of service and not on the age at which he retires. “Retirement at sixty years is not an entitling fact, which leads the employee to acquire a right to receive gratuity, which he otherwise does not have. An employee gets his right to gratuity according to the number of the years that he serves,” held Justice J.J. Munir. Gujarat High Court The Labour Court Must Give The Employer An Opportunity To Be Heard Before Concluding The Enquiry : Gujarat High Court Case Title: Rajkot Municipal Corporation Versus Rajeshbhai Ramjibhai Purabiya LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 65 The Gujarat High Court division ...

Labour & Service Weekly Round-Up: 6th May to 12th May 2024

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags