EDUCATION AMOUNTS TO PUBLIC FUNCTION – HENCE WRIT MAINTAINABLE AGAINST PRIVATE SCHOOL

EDUCATION AMOUNTS TO PUBLIC FUNCTION – HENCE WRIT MAINTAINABLE AGAINST PRIVATE SCHOOL

INTRODUCTION The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Marwari Balika Vidyalaya vs. Asha Shrivastava and Ors. Civil Appeal No. 9166 of 2013 has held that the Writ of Mandamus was maintainable against a Private Unaided School. FACTS IN BREIF Respondent No. 1 applied for the position of an ‘Assistant Teacher’ at the Appellant organization. In view of the same, an interview was conducted, and Respondent No. 1 was appointed on probation in…

Read More

Bosses Can’t Be Punished For Suicide of Overburdened Juniors

Bosses Can’t Be Punished For Suicide of Overburdened Juniors

On 10.04.2019, a software engineer working with a multi-national I.T. Company committed suicide. News Reports suggest that deceased was forced to take such a step owing to stress and harassment at work. With the rising amount of stress people face in their daily lives apart from the pressure and stress which is derived from their work, some employees who cannot handle such pressure are vulnerable to committing suicide and some even end up their lives…

Read More

Whether ‘SPECIAL ALLOWANCES’ are a part of Basic Wages?

Whether ‘SPECIAL ALLOWANCES’ are a part of Basic Wages?

…An Insight For the better part of the last decade, the question that was there amongst both Labour Law practitioners and the Central Government Industrial Tribunals all around this Country was based on the specific question of law as to whether ‘allowances’ bearing different nomenclature, paid by any establishment to its employees would necessarily fall within the definition of ‘basic wages’ as provided u/s 2 (b) (ii) r/w sec 6 of the Employees’ Provident Fund…

Read More

NO GRATUITY CLAIM FOR TEACHERS – JUDGEMENT PER INCURIUM!!!

NO GRATUITY CLAIM FOR TEACHERS – JUDGEMENT PER INCURIUM!!!

In the matter of Birla Institute of Technology vs The State of Jharkhand and Ors., Civil Appeal No. 2530 of 2012, the Apex Court observed that irrespective of the nature of employment, a Teacher shall not be entitled to claim Gratuity under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (‘Act’). FACTS Respondent No. 4 in the said matter, joined the services of the appellant organization in the year 1971 as an Assistant Professor…

Read More

Need Not Choose Between Motherhood And Employment

Need Not Choose Between Motherhood And Employment

Recently in the matter of Rasitha C.H. vs State of Kerala and Ors. WP. (C) No. 5507/2018, the Hon’ble Kerela High Court has reiterated that benefits of maternity cannot be refused merely on the nature of employment. In the present case in hand, the writ petitioner was working an Assistant Professor in Medical Microbiology on contract basis at the School of Health Sciences, in Calicut University. She had been working with the said institute since…

Read More

APPREHENSION OF FUTURE AILMENT – NOT A VALID GROUND TO REFUSE EMPLOYMENT

APPREHENSION OF FUTURE AILMENT – NOT A VALID GROUND TO REFUSE EMPLOYMENT

CASE Union of India and Ors. vs. Nenavath Suresh (31.08.2018 – HYHC): MANU/AP/0425/2018 RATIO Mere apprehension about future medical complications cannot be a ground for regarding a candidate as unfit for present employment. BREIF FACTS OF THE CASE The respondent applied for the position of Work Assistant in the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India; He was appointed in ad hoc service to a position of Work Assistant which was reserved to Scheduled Tribes;…

Read More

YET ANOTHER WHIP – FOR A REASONED ORDER

YET ANOTHER WHIP – FOR A REASONED ORDER

CASE Central Board of Trustees vs Indore Composite Pvt. Ltd.  – {2018 (8) SCC 443} RATIO In case of the absence of any application of judicial mind to the factual and legal controversy involved and without there being any discussion, appreciation, reasoning and categorical findings on the issue, a writ petition does not deserve to be upheld or reversed. BREIF FACTS OF THE CASE Appellant issued summons u/s 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and…

Read More

EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK

EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK

An employee engaged for the same work, cannot be paid less than another, who performs the same duties and responsibilities. This was the view laid down by the Supreme Court of India in the matter of State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Jagjit Singh and Ors. The Apex Court observed that India being a Welfare State, it would be nothing but demeaning to deprive any temporary worker here of his/her right to equal pay for…

Read More

Impleading of Immediate employers (Contractors) in proceedings under section 45A of Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948. (“ESI Act”)

Impleading of Immediate employers (Contractors) in proceedings under section 45A of Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948. (“ESI Act”)

In today’s competitive world employers engaging services of contractors is very common. However, ESIC acts as recovery agents in sending the employers notice u/s 45A of the ESI Act to recover the ESI contributions. ESIC targets outsourcing of service and attempts to recover the ESI Contributions from the principal employer without impleading contractors as a party. Many a times, ESIC contributions are paid by the principal employer, but the record may not be available with…

Read More

RETROSPECTIVE RECOVERY POST-RETIREMENT/ SUPERANNUATION BAD IN LAW

RETROSPECTIVE RECOVERY POST-RETIREMENT/ SUPERANNUATION BAD IN LAW

  Petitioner: Grace George Pampoorickal Respondents: Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors. Court: Bombay High Court Date of Order: 20.04.2018 Citation: WP No. 1010 of 2015 FACTS OF THE CASE: In the present matter, the Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Trained Teacher by the Municipal Corporation in Mumbai in the year 1970. In February 2010 when the Petitioner reached the age of Superannuation, her last drawn salary amounted to Rs. 9200/- (INR). Thereafter…

Read More
1 2 3 8