Labour court has no jurisdiction to set aside the termination under Section 33(c) (2) of I.D. Act.
M/s. Cadila Healthcare Ltd. vs. Presiding Officer. 2024 (180) FLR 888 (J&K & Ladakh H.C.)
When the enquiry was found fair and proper and the Enquiry Officer rightly arrived at the conclusion, industrial tribunal has no power to modify the punishment.
Regional Manager, Central Bank of India vs. Presiding Officer. 2024 (181) FLR 424 (All. H.C.)
Even if the termination is found illegal, court has powers to award compensation in lieu of reinstatement.
Smt. Seema vs. Management of M/s. Colonel Security Chembers. 2024 (182) FLR 71 (Delhi H.C.)
Court not to interfere with the punishment for unauthorised absence of 200 days when the employee was already served with warnings on 6 times for absence.
MGNT., Hyundai Motor India Ltd. vs. Mrs. K. Muthukumar. 2024 (182) FLR 712 (Mad. H.C.)
Labour court under Section 33-C of I.D. Act is powerless to grant interest on payment of breach, while high court has jurisdiction to grant interest.
Agent/CE (E&M), Sodepur/Nemeatpur, Central Workshop, Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs. Dilip Kumar Viswakarma. 2024 (183) FLR 311 (Cal. H.C.)
When labour court found the enquiry fair and proper and also upheld the management order of punishment, High court cannot interfere in the finding recorded by labour court under article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India.
Laxman Odarmal Chatvani vs. Gandhidham Co-Operative Bank Ltd. 2024 LLR 1197 (Guj. H.C.)
The labour court cannot intervene during disciplinary proceedings and prevent the employer from taking it to the logical end. Court cannot grant interim stay restraining the employer from imposing punishment after issuing final show cause notice.
Dagadu Vasant Mudgal vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. 2024 LLR 1229 (Bom. H.C.)
