Appointment–– It clear that in case any of the teachers has been working elsewhere or has been working in a different capacity in the Institute, such teachers shall not be entitled to the benefit of the above declaration. Their further fate will depend on the fresh decision to be taken by the appellant. .....Indian Institute of IT =VS= Dr. Anurika Vaish, [3 LM (SC) 20] ....View Full Judgment

Appointed as daily wager–– Appointed as daily wager on 01.04.1986 by the Water Resources Department of the State. The services of the appellant were regularized on work charge establishment to the post of Pump Operator by order dated 06.05.2008. After attaining the age of superannuation, the appellant retired on 30.07.2011. The appellant was, however, not paid the gratuity amount by the State which, according to him, was payable to him after his retirement. .....Netram Sahu =VS= State of Chhattisgarh, [4 LM (SC) 86] ....View Full Judgment

Compensation–– The appellant is the Cooperative Marketing Society. The respondent was working with the appellant as a Peon from 01.07.1973. The appellant terminated the services of the respondent on 01.07.1985. The respondent, therefore, got the reference made through the State to the Labour Court to decide the legality and correctness of his termination order.
The appellant and respondent both were aggrieved by the award and filed writ petitions before the High Court to challenge the legality and correctness of the award passed by the Labour Court. The High Court, however, dismissed both the writ petitions. The respondent then accepted the compensation, which was awarded by the Labour Court.
The Labour Court was, therefore, justified in answering the reference in appellant's favour and against the respondent by rightly holding that Section 25(H) of the ID Act had no application to the facts of this case whereas the High Court (Single Judge and Division Bench) was not right in allowing the respondent's prayer by directing the appellant to give him reemployment on the post of Peon. The appeal succeeds accordingly allowed. Impugned order is set aside and the award of the Labour Court is restored. ...Barara Cooperative Marketing =VS= Workman Pratap Singh, [6 LM (SC) 149] ....View Full Judgment

Entitled to continuity of service till the date of his superannuation with all service benefits–– Filed by the respondent has been allowed and an order dated 29th July, 2005 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and that dated directing removal of the respondent from the service of the appellant-bank quashed. The High Court has as a result directed the appellant bank to provide all service/retiral benefits to the petitioner within ninety days of the order. The challenge mounted by the appellant arises in the following circumstances:
We assume that the High Court’s direction for release of service benefits would include the release of his salaries also for the period mentioned above. We are, however, of the opinion that while proceedings need not be remanded for a fresh start from the beginning, grant of full salary for the period between the date of dismissal and the date of superannuation would not also be justified. We, therefore, allow this appeal but only in part and to the extent that while orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority shall stand quashed, and the respondent entitled to continuity of service till the date of his superannuation with all service benefits on that basis, he shall be entitled to only 50% of the salary for the period between the date of his removal from service till the date of superannuation. .....Allahabad Bank =VS= Krishna Narayan Tewari, [3 LM (SC) 1] ....View Full Judgment

Posts of Legal Advisors, Law Officers and Law Instructors on contractual basis, the tribunal and the High Court ought not to have interfered with the policy decision of the Government–– The Government Resolutions dated 21.08.2006 and 15.09.2006 and also the terms of the agreement entered into by the respondents with the government. Creation of posts was only for administrative purposes for sanction of the amount towards expenditure incurred but merely because the posts were created, they cannot be held to be permanent in nature. When the government has taken a policy decision to fill up 471 posts of Legal Advisors, Law Officers and Law Instructors on contractual basis, the tribunal and the High Court ought not to have interfered with the policy decision to hold that the appointments are permanent in nature. .....STATE OF MAHARASHTRA =VS= ANITA, [1 LM (SC) 632] ....View Full Judgment