Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

771 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 201–400.

K.C. JOSHIversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 9823 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

K.C. Joshi was appointed as Store Keeper in the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) and, after completing his probation, was placed on the regular establishment. He was an active trade‑union worker and, following union actions, his services were terminated on 29 December 1967 with one month’s pay in lieu of notice, t

RAJESHWAR MAHTOversusALOK KUMAR GUPTA, G.M. M/S BIRLA CORPORATION LTD.

2018 INSC 19723 February 2018Disposed off

The employee Rajeshwar Mahto was terminated by Birla Corporation Ltd. and challenged the termination before an Industrial Tribunal, which held he was not a "workman". The High Court set aside that award, declaring him a workman, but the Supreme Court later allowed the corporation's appeal, reinstating the tribunal's de

STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHERversusHARIHAR YADAV AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 77522 November 2013Disposed off

The Bihar Hill Area Lift Irrigation Corporation (BHALCO), a government company of Bihar, was transferred to the newly created Jharkhand Hill Area Lift Irrigation Corporation (JHALCO) after the bifurcation of Bihar under the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000. Employees of the erstwhile BHALCO filed writ petitions seeking a

VIJAY KUMAR AND ORS.versusWHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 117322 November 2007Dismissed

The appellants, who had taken a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) on 26 May 1995 and received the stipulated payments, later claimed that a settlement dated 13 October 1995 between the employer and the workmen’s union, which altered wages and retirement age, also applied to them. The settlement expressly covered "perma

BHOLA NATH MUKHERJEE AND ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 137222 November 1996Dismissed

The Asansol Electricity Supply Co. Ltd., a licensee under the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, had its licence revoked and was compelled to sell its undertaking to the West Bengal State Electricity Board (the Board). The Board paid a purchase price and continued the employees, but offered them fresh, temporary appointment

DENA NATH AND ORS.versusNATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD. AND ORS.

1991 INSC 31422 November 1991Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered appeals filed by Dena Nath and others against National Fertilizers Ltd. The issue was whether failure by a principal employer to obtain registration under Section 7 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, or by a contractor to obtain a licence under Section 12, would ca

SRI DORAIRAJ SPINTEXversusR CHITTIBABU & ORS

2021 INSC 52722 September 2021Disposed off

The management of Sri Dora Raj Spintax dismissed thirty‑one workmen after initiating disciplinary proceedings for alleged vandalism, while conciliation proceedings were pending on two separate industrial disputes raised by the workmen. The workmen claimed that the dismissals required prior permission under Section 33(1

RAM PRAVESH SINGH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 64622 September 2006Dismissed

The appellants were employees of a co‑operative society that was liquidated and its undertaking merged with the Bihar Electricity Board. The Board did not take over the employees, and the appellants filed writ petitions seeking their absorption. The High Court dismissed the petitions and the appeal was upheld. The Supr

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEEversusSHRI ASHOK HARIKUNI AND ANR. ETC.

2000 INSC 45922 September 2000Dismissed

The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, created under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, terminated several temporary employees, prompting the Labour Court to order their reinstatement. The Committee challenged the Labour Court’s jurisdiction, arguing that it was not an "industry" u

AMETEEP MACHINE TOOLSversusLABOUR COURT HARYANA & ANOTHER

1980 INSC 18522 September 1980Dismissed

Ametep Machine Tools, a manufacturer employing 250 workers, entered into a settlement under Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act on June 20, 1969, which barred further financial demands for two years. In August 1970 a fresh demand for dearness allowance led to a sit‑down strike, and the management alleged that wor

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATLON AND ORS.versusZAKIR HUSSAIN

2005 INSC 36622 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Zakir Hussain, was appointed as a daily‑wage conductor on a two‑year probation and was terminated for unsatisfactory performance without any enquiry. He appealed to the departmental authority, which dismissed his grievance, and then filed a suit in a civil court seeking a declaration that the terminatio

BHARAT BHAWAN TRUSTversusBHARAT BHAWAN ARTISTS ASSOCIATION AND ANR.

2001 INSC 38722 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The Bharat Bhawan Trust, a statutory body created to promote art and culture, engaged a group of artists for drama production and theatre management. The artists later raised a dispute before the Labour Court, to which the Trust objected on the preliminary ground that it was not an "industry" and the artists were not "

KARNANI PROPERTIES LTD.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

1990 INSC 25022 August 1990Dismissed

Karnani Properties Ltd., a real‑estate company that lets premises and provides services such as electricity, water, cleaning and lift maintenance, was referred to an Industrial Tribunal over a dispute concerning wages, dearness allowance and gratuity. The company challenged the Tribunal’s award on the grounds that it d

JAMSHEDPUR CONTRACTORS' WORKERS' UNIONversusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1990 INSC 24922 August 1990Disposed off

Contract workers employed by Tata Iron and Steel Company, Jamshedpur, performed permanent and regular tasks before 11‑Feb‑1981 and sought permanent employment with the principal employer. The Bihar Government referred the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal under s.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Tribunal held th

THE WORKMEN OF M/S. BINNY LTD.versusTHE MANAGEMENT OF BINNY LTD. & ANOTHER

1985 INSC 18222 August 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The workmen of the former Binny & Co. Ltd., now employed by the amalgamated Binny Ltd., claimed a 20% bonus for the financial year 1969 based on a separate profit and loss account prepared for their original unit, which showed a substantial profit. The new company paid only a 4% bonus calculated on the consolidated pro

HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY MARKETING FEDERATION LIMITEDversusSANJAY

2009 INSC 94022 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Sanjay, worked as a casual chowkidar for the District Manager of HAFED in Jind from August to December 1998 (145 days) and thereafter for the District Manager of HAFED in Hissar from January to May 1999 (112 days). He claimed that, having completed more than 240 days of continuous service in the year pr

BROOKE BOND INDIA LTD.versusTHE WORKMEN

1981 INSC 12022 July 1981Dismissed

Brooke Bond India Ltd. and its workmen’s unions were involved in a government‑referenced industrial dispute. The Rashtriya Union’s negotiation committee signed a memorandum of settlement on 16 March 1978, which was later filed for an award. The union’s executive committee subsequently resolved to reject the agreement,

BHARAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK (MUMBAI) LTD.versusCO-OPERATIVE BANK EMPLOYEES UNION

2007 INSC 33122 March 2007Dismissed

Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd., a multi‑state co‑operative bank, challenged the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra Trade Union Act, arguing that under Section 2(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the "appropriate Government" for a "Banking Company" with branches in more than one state is the Central Governmen

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusBIKAR SINGH

2006 INSC 16522 March 2006

Bikar Singh, a conductor with Haryana Roadways, was dismissed for allegedly embezzling fare money. He appealed the dismissal to the Additional Transport Commissioner, which was rejected, and then filed a civil suit seeking a declaration that he remained in service and that the dismissal orders were void. The trial civi

J.H. PATEL (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusNUBOARD MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. & ORS.

[2014] 1 S.C.R. 77322 January 2014Case Partly allowed

Three union officials, declared as protected workmen, were dismissed after the employer alleged they had filed a false police complaint against senior officers. The criminal court had acquitted the officers, and the employer issued a charge‑sheet without conducting a departmental inquiry, relying on the magistrate's ju

STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.versusGANPATHI CHAYA NAIK & ORS.

2010 INSC 5522 January 2010Case Allowed

The respondents, who were daily‑wage workers such as plantation watchmen, wireless operators and helpers, claimed regularisation of service after more than ten years of continuous employment. The State of Karnataka contended that the respondents were not recruited under the prescribed recruitment rules and that the reg

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, APSRTC AND ORS.versusP. LAKSHMOJI RAO AND ORS.

2004 INSC 5022 January 2004Disposed off

The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) recruited conductors on a daily‑wage basis and later regularized them, counting seniority from the date of regularization. The conductors filed writ petitions under Article 226 seeking to have their regular appointment deemed effective from the date of their

BALMER LAWRIE WORKERS' UNION, BOMBAY AND ANR.versusBALMER LAWRIE AND CO. LTD. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 24121 December 1984Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a challenge by the Balmer Lawrie Workers Union (a non‑recognised union) to the constitutional validity of Section 20(2)(b) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 and to Clause 17 of a settlement that required a 15 % deduction from ar

E.S.IC. MEDICAL OFFICER'S ASSOCIATIONversusE.S.L.C. & ANR.

2013 INSC 76921 November 2013Dismissed

The ESIC Medical Officer's Association, representing medical officers recruited by the Employees' State Insurance Corporation after 1974, claimed a monthly allowance of Rs.200, arguing that they were workmen like deputed doctors and thus entitled to the same benefits. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal held tha

RADHAKRISHNA MANI TRIPATHIversusL. H. PATEL & ANR.

2008 INSC 133221 November 2008Dismissed

The Second Labour Court, Thane, passed an ex‑parte award on 12 June 1998 reinstating the workman RadhaKrishnan Mani Tripathi, which was published on 5 August 1998. Respondent No.1, who had not been served notice, learned of the award on 27 January 1999 and filed a petition within two days under Rule 26(2) of the Bombay

RAJINDER SINGH CHAUHAN AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 57921 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, employees of the Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co‑operative Wholesales Stores Ltd (CONFED), were retrenched under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They challenged the retrenchment, contending that Section 25‑N, which applies to industrial establishments, should govern their cas

LENIN KUMAR RAYversusM/S EXPRESS PUBLICATIONS (MADURAI) LTD.

2024 INSC 80221 October 2024

The employee, Lenin Kumar Ray, was appointed as Junior Engineer and later promoted to Assistant Engineer in a newspaper publishing company, drawing a salary well above the pre‑amendment threshold of Rs.1,600 per month. He was relieved on 8 October 2003 with payment of one month’s salary in lieu of notice, which he acce

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.versusSARVA SHRAMIK SANGH, SANGLI AND ORS.

2013 INSC 70821 October 2013Disposed off

The State of Maharashtra terminated the services of 256 workmen employed on 25 lift‑irrigation schemes after transferring the schemes to a sugar factory. The workmen claimed entitlement to reinstatement and backwages, arguing that the termination was a breach of Section 25N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, while t

CENTRAL ORGANISATION OF TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY EMPLOYEESversusTAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

2005 INSC 51421 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board could alter pension benefits of its employees without formally amending the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Liberalised Pension Regulations, 1960. The Board had relied on a settlement clause to bypass the 15‑day notice under Section 9A of the Industrial Disputes

RAMA KANT MISRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 7721 October 1982Appeal(s) allowed

Rama Kant Misra, a workman with over 14 years of service and secretary of the workers' union, was charged on 18 November 1971 with using abusive and threatening language towards a senior officer over a wage deduction. An inquiry found the charge proved and recommended dismissal, which was effected on 6 April 1972 befor

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION & ANR.versusMANGALAM PUBLICATIONS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED

2017 INSC 97321 September 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) sought contribution from Mangalam Publications, a private limited company, for interim relief payments made to its employees between April 1996 and March 2000. The company argued that the interim relief was an ex‑gratia payment, not "wages" under Section 2(22) of the Em

JITENDRA NATH SINGHversusTHE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR & ORS.

2012 INSC 41521 September 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant workmen sought priority over the sale proceeds of unsecured assets of UMI Special Steels Ltd., arguing that under Sections 529 and 529A of the Companies Act, 1956, workmen's dues should rank ahead of secured creditors on those assets. The respondents, representing the secured creditors, contended that the

JAYANTIBHAI RAOJIBHAI PATELversusMUNICIPAL COUNCIL, NARKHED & ORS.

2019 INSC 93421 August 2019Disposed off

Jayantibhai Patel, a headmaster, was first cleared of misconduct in 1994 but a second inquiry—conducted without recorded reasons—found him guilty and led to his removal in 1996. The High Court later quashed the removal but denied back wages, reasoning that Patel had retired. The Supreme Court held that when service is

CANTEEN MAZDOOR SABHAversusMETALLURGICAL ENGG. CONSULTANTS (I) LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 85221 August 2007Dismissed

The Canteen Mazdoor Sabha filed a civil appeal challenging a Jharkhand High Court decision that set aside an Industrial Tribunal award granting canteen workers the same pay scales as MECON’s VIP Guest House and Tea Club employees. The core issue was whether a master‑servant (employer‑employee) relationship existed betw

AVTAR SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2017 INSC 111621 July 2016Reference answered

The petitioners challenged the cancellation of their appointments and termination of service on the ground that they had either omitted or misrepresented information about criminal prosecutions, arrests, convictions or pendency of cases in the verification forms required for recruitment. The Supreme Court was asked to

GARRISON ENGINEER (UTILITY) BHATINDAversusSHRI NARINDER SINGH

2007 INSC 65821 May 2007Disposed off

Shri Narinder Singh, a daily‑wage mazdoor, was engaged by the Garrison Engineer (Utility) of Bhatinda, a Defence Department establishment, from 1 January 1985 to 15 January 1987 and was terminated on 16 January 1987. After about five years he filed a reference seeking regularisation, contending that he had rendered ser

GOA FOUNDATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 96221 April 2014Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined public‑interest petitions concerning illegal iron‑ore mining in Goa, the validity of the Justice Shah Commission report, and the status of mining leases deemed to have arisen from pre‑1961 Portuguese concessions. It held that the Commission’s report could not be quashed for procedural lapses,

UNION OF INDIAversusGURBACHAN SINGH AND ANR.

1997 INSC 42021 April 1997Dismissed

The respondent, who had not produced documentary proof of his date of birth, was assessed by a medical board to be about 25 years old and was allowed to retire in 1984 instead of 1980. He filed an application before the Labour Court under Section 33-C(ii) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking all retirement ben

MOHAN LALversusMANAGEMENT OF M/S BHARAT ELECTRONICS LTD.

1981 INSC 9721 April 1981Appeal(s) allowed

Mohan Lal was employed as a salesman by Bharat Electronics Ltd. from 8 December 1973 and his services were terminated on 19 October 1974. The Labour Court held that the termination was a lawful dismissal on probation and not retrenchment. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether the termination fell within the def

WORKMEN REPRESENTED BY AKHIL BHARTIYA KOYLA KAMGAR UNIONversusEMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF INDUSTRY COLLIERY OF M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD AND ORS

2001 INSC 16021 March 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The workmen of a coking coal colliery were retrenched in June 1971 before the mine was taken over by the Central Government and nationalised under the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972. After nationalisation, the new management, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., refused to re‑employ the 111 retrenched workers. The I

AJOY KUMAR BANERJEE & ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDLA & ORS. ETC.

1984 INSC 6421 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, employees of the nationalised general insurance companies, challenged the 30 September 1980 notification introducing the General Insurance (Rationalisation and Revision of Pay Scales and Other Conditions of Service) Second Amendment Scheme, alleging it violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 31 of the Const

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusG.M. KOKIL AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 6521 March 1984Dismissed

The Union of India appealed a decision of the Central Government Labour Court which had granted overtime wages at double the ordinary rate to 78 employees of the India Security Press, Nasik, under s.59 of the Factories Act read with s.70 of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. The appellants argued that the r

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusVIPIN BEHARI LAL SRIVASTAVA

2008 INSC 23421 February 2008Case Allowed

The respondent, a permanent typist, was removed from service on the ground of unauthorized absence. The Industrial Tribunal held that he was suffering from tuberculosis, had applied for sick leave and that the employer had not acted on his applications, thus ordering reinstatement with back wages. The Allahabad High Co

SAT PAL PURIversusPUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS.

2008 INSC 23721 February 2008Disposed off

The appellants, technical field staff of the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB), filed a writ petition seeking parity in remuneration for work performed on Saturdays and Sundays, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Municipal Employees Union v. State of Punjab. The Punjab & Haryana High Court had allowed the c

CIPLA LTD.versusMAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION AND ORS.

2001 INSC 10021 February 2001

Cipla Ltd employed cleaning staff through a contractor and routinely terminated them after eleven months to avoid granting permanent status. The Maharashtra General Kamgar Union filed a complaint under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, alleging unfair

OIL & NATURAL GAS CORPN. LTD.versusENGINEERING MAZDOOR SANGH

2006 INSC 86720 November 2006Disposed off

The Oil & Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) employs seasonal casual/contingent workers for field survey work from November to May each year. The Engineering Mazdoor Sangh sought regularisation of those workers who had completed at least 240 days of attendance in a twelve‑month period, invoking Rule 2 of the Certified Stan

STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusMADHUSUDAN DAS & ORS.

2008 INSC 118620 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the death of Bhagirathi Das, a mine employee of Steel Authority of India Ltd., who collapsed while on duty. His son sought a compassionate appointment under Para 8.9.4 of the 1989 Memorandum of Settlement, which provides such appointment only if death is due to an accident arising out of and in the c

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusGANESH RAZAK AND ANR.

1994 INSC 47320 October 1994

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (appellant) challenged awards granted by the Labour Court to daily‑rated/casual workers (respondents) who claimed equal pay with regular employees under the principle of equal pay for equal work. The workers sought computation of arrears of wages at the regular workers' rate, invoking

M. L. SINGLAversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ANR.

2018 INSC 84120 September 2018Dismissed

The employee M.L. Singla was dismissed by Punjab National Bank after a domestic enquiry that found him guilty of consuming liquor on duty and causing a cash shortage. He challenged the dismissal before the Labour Court, which set aside the dismissal and awarded 50% back wages, but the High Court reversed that award and

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIAversusGEN. SECY. FCI INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS.

2018 INSC 72020 August 2018Dismissed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) employed 955 workers at its Chennai branch and disputed whether they were its employees or contract labourers hired through a cooperative society. The workers' union claimed they were permanent employees entitled to regularisation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The matter w

K.K. SURESH & ANR. ETC.versusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

2018 INSC 72020 August 2018Dismissed

The appellants, who worked as clerical staff in the premises of the Food Corporation of India (FCI) since 1997, filed writ petitions seeking regularisation and absorption as FCI employees. FCI contended that the appellants were appointed by the Head Load Workers Co‑operative Society and not by FCI, thus no employer‑emp

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.versusHEAD LOAD LABOUR CONGRESS (REGN. NO336/85) & ANR.

2018 INSC 72020 August 2018Dismissed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) was directed by an Industrial Tribunal in Chennai to regularise its workers after abolishing the contract labour system, an award that the Supreme Court later upheld. The workers' union filed writ petitions seeking a mandamus to extend the same regularisation benefits to employees wo

INDIA YAMAHA MOTOR PVT. LTD.versusDHARAM SINGH & ANR.

2014 INSC 54720 August 2014Dismissed

India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd., the management of a manufacturing unit, challenged the competence of 113 workmen to be represented before the Industrial Tribunal by five elected workmen. The dispute centered on whether Section 6‑1 of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and Rule 40 of the Uttar Pradesh Industr

CURRENCY NOTE PRESS & ANR.versusN. N. SARDESAI & ORS.

2018 INSC 62520 July 2018Dismissed

The Currency Note Press, a government-owned corporation, was sued by 17 former employees who claimed overtime wages for work done between 1986 and 1990 under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court dismissed their applications, but the Bombay High Court set aside that order and granted th

DES RAJ, ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ETC.

1988 INSC 11120 April 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined three appeals filed by employees of the Irrigation Departments of Punjab and Haryana who sought relief under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, after their applications were rejected by the Labour Court on the ground that the employer was not an ‘industry’. The Court considered whether the Ir

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusKANKUBEN (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2006 INSC 15620 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The workmen (respondents) filed applications under Section 33‑C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking recovery of overtime allowances for duties involving moving locomotives. The Labour Court allowed the applications and awarded the claimed amounts. The employer (Indian Railways) challenged the award by filin

BHARAT FORGE COMPANY LTD.versusAB. ZODGE AND ANR.

1996 INSC 29320 February 1996Disposed off

Bharat Forge Co. Ltd. challenged the Industrial Tribunal's refusal to allow it to adduce fresh evidence in support of a dismissal order against employee AB Zodge. The Tribunal, and subsequently the Bombay High Court, held that under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the employer could not be permitted t

TATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.versusSMT. SURESHWATI

2021 INSC 3220 January 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a claim by Smt. Sureshwati that her services as a clerk/assistant teacher in a private school turned government‑aided were illegally retrenched on 8 March 2006 without a disciplinary enquiry. The school contended that she had abandoned her post in July 1997 after marriage and had not been in continuo

RADHA RAMAN SAMANTAversusBANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

2003 INSC 74219 December 2003Appeal(s) allowed

R.R. Samanta was appointed as a Badli Subordinate Staff/Sepoy in the Bank of India and worked for about 492 days before being asked to stop. He filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking direction for his absorption as a regular employee. The High Court Single Judge allowed the petition, but th

M/S. LAXMI RATTAN COTTON MILLS LTD.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS .

2008 INSC 131819 November 2008Appeal(s) allowed

In 1980-81 Laxmi Rattan Cotton Mills Ltd. engaged six workers as trainee investigators on a stipend, expressly stating no obligation to appoint them thereafter. After training, the mill offered them clerk positions, which they accepted without protest and later made permanent. When the mill became sick and closed in 19

DENA BANKversusKRITI KUMAR T. PATEL

1997 INSC 74419 November 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K.T. Patel, was dismissed from Dena Bank and the Central Industrial Tribunal ordered his reinstatement, which the bank challenged before the Gujarat High Court. The High Court stayed the award but required the bank to pay wages under Section 17‑B of the Industrial Disputes Act. The respondent sought pay

GUJARAT STEEL TUBES LTD.versusGUJARAT STEEL TUBES MAZDOOR SABHA

1979 INSC 24419 November 1979Dismissed

Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. and its workers' union, Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha, clashed after the company terminated 853 employees during an illegal strike. The dispute was referred to arbitration under Section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the arbitrator upheld the dismissals. The union challenged

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusJUMMASHA DIWAN

2006 INSC 72419 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a daily‑wage casual worker on a railway electrification project, was retrenched when the project closed and received compensation under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He challenged the retrenchment, claiming 1,060 days of continuous service that should have given him higher seniority

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusSARJEET SINGH AND ANR.

2006 INSC 73119 October 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Rajasthan and a Gram Panchayat jointly implemented the "Jal Pradyot Vojna" water‑supply scheme, under which the Gram Panchayat hired Sarjeet Singh as a pump driver on a fixed‑term contract that was extended until the scheme’s completion on 7 Nov 1997. When the scheme ended, his services were terminated. He

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusTARUN KUMAR BANERJEE AND ORS.

2000 INSC 45119 September 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant State Bank of India dismissed its Head Cashier, T. Arun Kumar Banerjee, after a domestic enquiry found him guilty of misappropriating Rs.1,000 received in excess from a customer. The Central Industrial Tribunal set aside the dismissal, relying on the non‑examination of the customer, non‑production of the

JACOB M. PUTHUPARAMBIL AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusKERALA WATER AUTHORITY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1990 INSC 29219 September 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala Water Authority (KWA) was created under the Kerala Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1986, transferring all Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) employees to the Authority. Employees were divided into four groups based on their dates of appointment, and many faced termination. The petitioners sought regu

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusGNANAMBIGAI MILLS LTD.

2005 INSC 30019 July 2005Appeal(s) allowed

Employees of Gnanambigai Mills Ltd demanded a wage increase, and the dispute was referred to a Special Tribunal. The Tamil Nadu Government, invoking Section 10‑B of the Industrial Disputes Act, issued orders on 15 July 1985 and 29 July 1985 directing the employer to make interim payments to the workmen, with a clause t

LOKMATNEWSPAPERS PVT. LTD.versusSHANKAR PRASAD

1999 INSC 27919 July 1999Dismissed

Lokmat Newspapers introduced photo‑type composing machines, rendering hand‑composing workers surplus. It issued a notice under Section 9‑A of the Industrial Disputes Act on 25 March 1982, after the machines were already in operation, and initiated conciliation proceedings which were closed at 4:35 pm on 22 June 1982. T

AVISHEK RAJA & ORS.versusSANJAY GUPTA

2017 INSC 48819 June 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a large group of contempt petitions filed by newspaper establishments alleging that they had failed to implement the Majithia Wage Board Award, which had been upheld by the Court in a 2014 judgment. The petitioners claimed wilful disobedience of the award, seeking civil contempt under Section

THE WORKMEN THROUGH THE CONVENER FCI LABOUR FEDERATIONversusRAVUTHAR DAWOOD NASEEM

2020 INSC 40119 May 2020Dismissed

The workmen, represented by the FCI Labour Federation, sought to compel the Food Corporation of India (FCI) to regularise contract labourers under the Departmental Labour System (DLS) as directed by the Supreme Court in a 2018 order. The corporation had instead regularised the workers under its long‑existing Direct Pay

ASSISTANT ENGINEER, RAJASTHANversusRAM CHARAN

2006 INSC 34919 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The employer (Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan) terminated pump driver Ram Charan. The Labour Court held that the termination violated Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and ordered reinstatement with 25% back wages. The employer challenged the award in the High Court; the Single Judge dismissed the writ pet

PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ORS.

2018 INSC 37719 April 2018Dismissed

Paradeep Phosphates Ltd., a public sector undertaking, raised the retirement age of its employees from 58 to 60 years in 1998 on a government directive to curb losses. When the financial situation did not improve, the government ordered a rollback to 58 years in 2001, and the company withdrew the earlier order in 2002

K. K. SAKSENAversusINTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE & ORS.

2014 INSC 89218 December 2014Dismissed

K.K. Saksena, a former Secretary of the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage (ICID), challenged his termination in a writ petition under Article 226, alleging arbitrariness and violation of Article 14. The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition, holding that ICID is not a "State" within Article 12 and d

BANK OF BARODA & ORS.versusGANPAT SINGH DEORA

2008 INSC 147818 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Ganpat Singh Deora, a Bank of Baroda employee aged 40 with 13 years of service, opted for voluntary retirement under the Bank's 2001 Voluntary Retirement Scheme (BOBEVRS‑2001). While he received the scheme’s retiral benefits, his claim for a pension under the Bank of Baroda Employees Pension Regulations, 1995 was denie

THE DEPOT MANAGER A.P.S.R.T.C.versusP. JAYARAM REDDY

2008 INSC 148018 December 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a conductor employed on a casual basis, was removed for misconduct and later reappointed without disclosing his prior dismissal. Upon discovery of this concealment, he was again dismissed following departmental proceedings. The Labour Court upheld the dismissal as valid but deemed the punishment harsh,

M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1998 INSC 49218 December 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court had ordered the closure of 168 industries, including Birla Textiles, and prescribed that workmen would retain continuity of service and receive full wages until the industries restarted at a new location. The management decided to relocate to Baddi, Himachal Pradesh, and issued several notices requiri

SUNIL KR. GHOSH & ORS.versusK. RAM CHANDRAN & ORS.

2011 INSC 81118 November 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The workers of Philips India Ltd. opposed the transfer of their factory to Kitchen Appliances India Ltd. and refused to join the new employer. After the Labour Department declined to refer their dispute to a tribunal, the workers filed a writ petition seeking retirement and retrenchment benefits. The Single Judge of th

GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOMversusS. SRINIVASA RAO AND ORS .

1997 INSC 73118 November 1997Dismissed

The Department of Telecom (DoT) of the Union of India appealed a High Court order that held the DoT to be an "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Supreme Court examined whether the DoT, engaged in commercial telecommunications services and not performing sovereign functions, falls within the definiti

R. THIRUVIRKOLAMversusPRESIDING OFFICER AND ANR.

1996 INSC 132018 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a technician employed by Madras Fertilizers Ltd., was dismissed on 18 November 1981 after a domestic inquiry that was later held defective by the Labour Court. The Labour Court, however, allowed the employer to prove misconduct and, on its own appraisal of the evidence, upheld the dismissal, issuing its

STATE OF HARYANAversusDILBAGH SINGH

2006 INSC 71018 October 2006Dismissed

The respondent, Dilbagh Singh, a Beldar in the Public Works Department, was terminated on 25‑December‑1999. A dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was referred to the Labour Court, which held that his termination violated Sections 25‑G and 25‑H because junior employees remained in service, and ordered his re

KRISHAN PRASAD GUPTAversusCONTROLLER, PRINTING AND STATIONERY

1995 INSC 63318 October 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Krishan Prasad Gupta, an employee, filed a claim under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act seeking recovery of unauthorized wage deductions. The Authority passed an ex‑parte order and the respondent appealed under Section 17 before the District Judge. While the appeal was pending, the Central Administrative Tribunal

DISTRICT PROGRAMME CO-OORDINATOR, MAHILA SAMKHYA AND ANR.versusABDUL KAREEM AND ANR.

2008 INSC 105818 September 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Mahila Samkhya, a Karnataka society, hired Abdul Kareem as a driver on a fixed‑term contract that was renewed for the period 1 November 1997 to 31 October 1999. The society terminated his services on 3 July 1998 invoking clause XIV of his appointment letter, alleging misconduct. The Labour Court held the termination il

MOHAN MAHTOversusM/S. CENTRAL COAL FIELD LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 94318 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

A workman employed by Central Coal Field Ltd. died in harness on 23‑02‑1997. His son, Mohan Mahto, applied for a compassionate appointment under sub‑clause (iii) of Clause 9.5.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA V), which required that a male dependent aged 15 or above be kept on a live roster and appointed upo

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.versusV.S.R. MURTHY AND ORS.

2001 INSC 44818 September 2001Dismissed

During BIFR proceedings, the Andhra Pradesh Government placed 1,486 surplus employees of Hyderabad Allwyn Ltd. in various government departments and super‑numerary posts, a scheme later sanctioned by BIFR in 1994. Subsequently, the State enacted an ordinance and the 1997 Andhra Pradesh Absorption Act prohibiting the ab

K.I. SHEPHARD & ORS. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1987 INSC 25518 September 1987Case Allowed

Three private banks were amalgamated with larger banks under schemes drawn pursuant to Section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. A total of 125 employees were excluded from service and their contracts terminated without being named in the draft schemes or given a hearing. The excluded employees challenged the exc

RASHTRIYA MILL MAZDOOR SANGH, NAGPURversusTHE MODEL MILLS, NAGPUR AND ANR.

1984 INSC 17118 September 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh filed four references under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act seeking bonus for workmen of Model Mills, Nagpur for the years 1964‑68, alleging the employer was liable under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The employer contended that a notified order under Section 18A of the Industries

M. S. SHIVANANDAversusKARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND OTHERS

1979 INSC 18518 September 1979Dismissed

The Karnataka Government promulgated the Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Ordinance, 1976 which provided that certain employees of contract carriage operators would be automatically absorbed into the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) at a ratio of 7.9 per vehicle. The Ordinance was later repealed and r

U.P.S.R.T.C.versusMITTHU SINGH

2006 INSC 52318 August 2006Case Partly allowed

Mitthu Singh, a bus driver for Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was terminated after three alleged incidents of refusing to stop the bus on signals from a checking squad. An enquiry officer found the charges proved and the termination was confirmed by the appellate authority. The Labour Court set aside t

NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN.versusH.H. PUJAR

2008 INSC 84418 July 2008Case Allowed

The respondent, a bus conductor, was found not to have issued tickets to 20 of 136 passengers when his bus was intercepted. A domestic enquiry concluded he was guilty and he was dismissed. The Labour Court set aside the dismissal, ordering reinstatement and back wages, on the ground that the cash bag and the ticket‑les

MICROWAVE PROJECT, KOTA AND ANR.versusRAMESH CHAND

2007 INSC 76318 July 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Chand was engaged as a casual labourer for a specific microwave project and worked for more than 240 days before the project was completed and the office was abolished. He challenged his termination, arguing that it violated the mandatory requirements of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Ind

AIR INDIAversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1995 INSC 40218 July 1995Dismissed

Air India, created under the Air Corporations Act, 1953, had its employees' service conditions governed by the Air India Employees Service Regulations framed under Section 45 of that Act. After the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner certified the standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946

M/S. HARYANA SURAJ MALTING LTD.versusPHOOL CHAND

2018 INSC 53718 May 2018Disposed off

The case concerned whether an Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court loses its jurisdiction to set aside an ex‑parte award once the award becomes enforceable under Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The appellant, Haryana Suraj Malting Ltd., sought to have an ex‑parte award against workman Phool Chand recal

INDER PAL YADAV AND ORS. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS ETC.

1985 INSC 9618 April 1985Dismissed

Project casual labourers of Indian Railways, who had served continuously for years, were terminated when their projects ended. They filed writ petitions invoking Articles 41, 42 and 14 of the Constitution, seeking security of employment. The Railway Ministry issued a scheme treating such workers as temporary after 360

VISHNU DAYAL JHUNJHUNWALA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

1984 INSC 8618 April 1984Dismissed

The appellant owned a sugar mill that had been permanently shut down before the Central Government issued an order under Rule 125A of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, taking over its management and appointing an authorised controller. The appellant argued that because the mill was closed and not engaged in production,

HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. LTD.versusGOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ANR.

2009 INSC 36518 March 2009Disposed off

Mrs. Manju Saxena, a staff officer of Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., was terminated after the bank discontinued her post and paid her a severance package of about Rs 8.17 lakh. The Government of India referred the dispute to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, which issued an interim award directing the ban

M.P. VIDYUT KARAMCHARI SANGHversusM.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD

2004 INSC 18318 March 2004Dismissed

The case concerned a dispute over the retirement age of employees of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. The Board, under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, reduced the retirement age to 58 years by a notification dated 26‑December‑2000, overturning an earlier agreement (dated 10‑June‑1996) that had

MIS RAHMAN INDUSTRIES PVT. LTDversusSTATE OF LJ.P. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 5318 January 2016Case Partly allowed

Mis Rahman Industries Pvt. Ltd. appealed against a High Court order that mandatorily directed the Government of Uttar Pradesh to refer a dispute raised by workmen to a Labour Court for adjudication. The Supreme Court examined whether such a direction infringed the Government's statutory discretion under the Industrial

WORKMEN OF BALMADIES ESTATESversusMANAGEMENT BALMADIES ESTATE AND ORS.

2008 INSC 6818 January 2008Dismissed

Two workmen, Stephen and Nallusami, were charged with theft of a pesticide and dismissed after a domestic enquiry that relied on the testimony of two witnesses who claimed the accused had confessed in their presence. The Labour Court held that the enquiry officer had not properly appreciated the evidence and that there

MIS. BLHAR CAUSTIC & CHEMICALS LTD.versusKRIPA PANDEY

2008 INSC 7118 January 2008Case Partly allowed

Kripa Pandey worked as a driver in the Bihar Caustic & Chemicals Ltd. factory during its construction, being engaged by a contractor under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. He was terminated in September 1984 and claimed that the termination was illegal, seeking reinstatement and back wages. The

GUJARAT AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITYversusRATHOD LABHU BECHAR AND ORS.

2001 INSC 3318 January 2001Disposed off

The Gujarat Agricultural University, a state‑aided institution, employed daily‑wage workers such as plumbers, carpenters and sweepers. The workers claimed regularisation and benefits of permanent Class IV employees after completing ten years of service, invoking Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Indu

CHOLAN ROADWAYS LTD.versusG. THIRUGNANASAMBANDAM

2004 INSC 72617 December 2004Appeal(s) allowed

A bus driven by the respondent crashed, killing seven passengers. The employer dismissed the driver after a domestic enquiry and sought approval of the dismissal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Tribunal refused approval, holding that the enquiry was flawed because the passengers we

BAJAJ AUTO LTD.versusBHOJANE GOPINATH D. AND ORS.

2003 INSC 72917 December 2003Disposed off

The workmen of Bajaj Auto Ltd. alleged that the company employed a rotation system of temporary workers to avoid granting permanency after 240 days of uninterrupted service, invoking Rule 4C of the Model Standing Orders. The Industrial Court found unfair labour practices under Item 6 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra R

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusKUNJI RAMAN

1996 INSC 150217 December 1996Case Partly allowed

Kunji Raman and 36 other work‑charged employees of the Mahi Sagar Project filed a writ petition alleging that the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 and the Rajasthan Service (Concessions on Project) Rules, 1962/1975 were inapplicable to them, depriving them of house‑rent allowance, project allowance and leave encashment. T

J. D. JAINversusTHE MANAGEMENT OF STATE BANK OF INDIA & ANR.

1981 INSC 20717 December 1981Dismissed

J.D. Jain, a cashier of State Bank of India, was charged with altering a letter of authority to withdraw Rs 1,500 instead of Rs 500, withdrawing the excess amount and misappropriating Rs 1,000. A departmental enquiry found him guilty and discharged him. The Industrial Tribunal, exercising powers under S. 11A of the Ind

PAWAN KUMAR AGARWALAversusGENERAL MANAGER-II & APPOINTING AUTH. STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 84217 November 2015Appeal(s) allowed

Pawan Kumaragarwala, a bank officer, was charged with misconduct for allegedly influencing a loan application and helping a borrower obtain a second loan from another SBI branch without disclosing an existing loan. A disciplinary enquiry found several charges proved and imposed dismissal. The High Court Single Judge se

AIR INDIA CABIN CREW ASSN. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 80817 November 2011Dismissed

The Air India Cabin Crew Association challenged the management’s revised promotion policy and the government’s 2003 directive that equalised the retirement and flying ages of male Flight Pursers and female Air Hostesses. The petitioners argued that these changes violated earlier bilateral settlements, the Air Corporati

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICILY BOARDversusDARBARA SINGH

2005 INSC 56917 November 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Electricity Board appointed the respondent as a daily‑wage peon for a series of specific, conditional periods, ending when a regular employee was hired. After the appointment ended in June 1989, the respondent filed a demand for reinstatement in 1997; the Labour Court ordered reinstatement with back wa

B.S. SHARMAversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2000 INSC 53317 November 2000Dismissed

The petitioner, a judicial officer of the Haryana Judicial Service, was transferred by the High Court in 1997 to serve as Presiding Officer of an Industrial Tribunal‑cum‑Labour Court. He argued that, under Section 7‑C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, he could remain in that post until the age of 67, even though th

RAM LAKHAN ETC. ETC.versusPRESIDING OFFICER AND ORS.

1999 INSC 52217 November 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, employees of Swatantra Bharat Mill, were charged and suspended in 1986 while an industrial dispute was pending before the Industrial Tribunal. The management filed an application under Section 33(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking permission to dismiss the employees after the enquiry. The

MANAGEMENT OF NILPUR TEA ESTATEversusSTATE OF ASSAM AND ORS.

1995 INSC 75217 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Management of Nilpur Tea Estate terminated the services of an employee on 1 February 1982 following a charge-sheet and domestic enquiry. The Labour Court set aside that termination and ordered reinstatement, a decision upheld by the High Court. While the reinstatement was pending, the employer again terminated the

BHAGWAN DASS CHOPRAversusUNITED BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

1987 INSC 33717 November 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Bhagwan Dass Chopra, a former clerk of Narang Bank of India Ltd., was terminated in February 1975 and raised an industrial dispute before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. While the case was pending, Narang Bank merged into United Bank of India (UBI) on 1 August 1976, and UBI was impleaded as the successor in

HIND FILTERS LTD. & ANR.versusHIND FILTER EMPLOYEES’ UNION & ANR.

2023 INSC 79917 August 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The management of Hind Filters Ltd. applied to the Labour Court for permission to retrench workers, but the Labour Commissioner referred the dispute to the Labour Court despite the establishment employing more than 100 workmen, which under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, would require referral to an In

DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, N.E.K.R.T.C.versusH.AMARESH

2006 INSC 43717 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, H. Amresh, a conductor with the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, was charged with several offences including consumption of alcohol while on duty and short‑remittance of cash. An internal inquiry found all charges proved and dismissed him. He raised an industrial dispute under Section 10(4) o

MANAGER (NOW REGIONAL DIRECTOR), R.B.I.versusGOPINATH SHARMA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 43817 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned Gopinath Sharma, a daily‑wage (Ticca Mazdoor) employee of the Reserve Bank of India, who worked only 58 days in 1975‑76 and was omitted from the 1976‑77 waiting list. After repeated representations, the dispute was referred to a Central Government Industrial Tribunal, which rejected his claim on grou

MAKHAN SINGHversusNARAINPURA CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LTD. & ANR.

1987 INSC 17117 July 1987Appeal(s) allowed

Makhan Singh, the Secretary of Narainpura Co‑operative Agricultural Service Society Ltd., was absent from work between 11‑May‑1981 and 29‑May‑1981, claiming illness and leave. The Society terminated his employment on 30‑May‑1981 without conducting a domestic enquiry and alleged that he had gone on strike without leave

ONGC LTD.versusPETROLEUM COAL LABOUR UNION & ORS.

2015 INSC 33817 April 2015Dismissed

The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) appointed security workmen through contractors, a cooperative society and later by direct memorandum, without following its recruitment rules. The workmen claimed regularisation after completing more than 240 days of service, alleging an unfair labour practice. The Industrial

U .P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusBIJLI MAZDOOR SANGH AND ORS.

[2007] 5 S.C.R. 25617 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd terminated two daily‑wage Chowkidars in 1979. The Industrial Tribunal held the termination illegal under s.25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and s.6‑N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ordered their reinstatement and deemed them regularised after three years. The High Court d

DIRECTOR, FOOD AND SUPPLIES, PUNJAB AND ANR.versusGURMIT SINGH

2007 INSC 43117 April 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Gurmit Singh was employed as a daily‑wage chowkidar by the Director, Food and Supplies, Punjab from 1 June 1985 until his termination on 25 August 1986 without notice or compensation. He invoked the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Court, which found he had worked more than 240 days and ordered his reins

TRANSMISSION CORPN., A.P. LTD. AND ORS.versusP. RAMACHANDRA RAO AND ANR.

2006 INSC 23017 April 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, who retired on 30 April 1990, sought parity in pension and terminal benefits with employees retiring on or after 1 July 1990, arguing that the corporation's pay‑scale revision dated 1 July 1990 discriminated against them. The corporation relied on a Memorandum of Settlement executed under Section 12(3)

M/S. EMPIRE INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 15617 March 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Empire Industries Ltd., locked out its Garlick Engineering factory over three demands: cessation of agitational activities, a ceiling on dearness allowance, and retrenchment of workers. The State of Maharashtra, exercising power under section 10(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, issued an order pr

HARI NANDAN PRASAD & ANR.versusEMPLOYER L/R TO MANGMT.OF FCI & ANR.

2014 INSC 10417 February 2014Case Partly allowed

The appellants, Hari Nandan Prasad and Govind Kumar Chaudhary, were casual daily‑wage workers of the Food Corporation of India who were terminated after more than 240 days of continuous service without notice, pay in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation, violating Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 194

GURU JAMBHESHWAR UNIVERSITY, HISARversusDHARAM PAL

2007 INSC 6217 January 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Guru Jambheshwar University terminated the services of Dharam Pal, an unskilled workman paid on a monthly basis, after closing its farming operations. The workman claimed that the retrenchment compensation paid under Section 25F(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was insufficient because the Labour Court had calcu

JAIPUR ZILA SAHAKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD.versusSHRI RAM GOPAL SHARMA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 2917 January 2002Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the dismissal of Ram Gopal Sharma by Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd while an industrial dispute was pending. The employer had filed an application for approval of the dismissal under the proviso to Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, but the application was reje

M/S. ORISSA TEXTILE AND STEEL LTD.versusSTATE OE ORISSA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 3117 January 2002Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the amended Section 25‑0 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (and the identical Section 6‑W of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act) which governs the closure of large industrial undertakings. The Court considered whether the procedural and substantive defects iden

HOMBE GOWDA EDN TRUST AND ANR.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 63016 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

A lecturer (Venkappa Gowda) assaulted the principal of a private college with a chappal and used abusive language. The management dismissed him under the Karnataka Private Educational Institutions (Discipline and Control) Act, 1975; he appealed to the Educational Appellate Tribunal, which set aside the dismissal and im

SONEPAT COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusRAKESH KUMAR

2005 INSC 63116 December 2005Dismissed

Sonepat Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. employed Rakesh Kumar on daily wages in its computer department from 1 July 1998 to 31 August 1999 and later terminated his services. Kumar claimed the termination violated Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 because he had worked more than 240 days in the preceding yea

MANAGEMENT OF M.C.D.versusPREM CHAND GUPTA AND ANR.

1999 INSC 56616 December 1999Disposed off

The Delhi Municipal Corporation (MCD) terminated the services of Prem Chand Gupta, a temporary Section Officer, on 29 April 1966 after he had served continuously for more than 240 days in a calendar year. Gupta raised an industrial dispute; the Labour Court and a High Court Single Judge held the termination was lawful

CRESCENT DYES AND CHEMICALS LTD.versusRAM NARESH TRIPATHI

1992 INSC 34316 December 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Ram Naresh Tripathi, a workman, was charge‑sheeted for misconduct and sought to be represented at his domestic enquiry by Talraja, an office‑bearer of a Mazdoor Union to which he belonged. The enquiry officer refused, stating that Talraja was not a member of a recognised or unrecognised union operating in the company a

THE CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA ANDversusM. J. JAMES

2021 INSC 73216 November 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The former manager of the Bank of Cochin, M.J. James, was dismissed for sanctioning advances in violation of head‑office instructions. During the disciplinary inquiry he was denied the right to be represented by an officer of a bank‑employees' union other than the Bank of Cochin, which he claimed violated Clause 22(ix)

M.D., KARNATAKA HANDLOOM DEV. CORPN. LTD.versusSRI MAHADEVA LAXMAN RAVAL

2006 INSC 85816 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Karnataka Handloom Development Corporation appointed Sri Mahadeva Laxman Raval as an expert weaver on a fixed‑term, honorarium‑based contract under the Vishwa programme. After the nine‑month contract expired, the corporation did not renew his engagement, and Raval claimed that his termination amounted to retrenchme

INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusWORKMAN, INDIAN DRUGS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.

2006 INSC 85916 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court considered a dispute where Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a loss‑making public sector undertaking, had appointed ten dependants of deceased employees as casual daily‑rate workers without any vacancy or rule. The Labour Court had ordered their regularisation and the High Court, while rejecting

GENERAL LABOUR UNION (RED FLAG) BOMBAYversusB. V. CHAVAN AND ORS.

1984 INSC 21416 November 1984Disposed off

The General Labour Union (Red Flag) Bombay filed two complaints alleging that the employers, Delta Wires Pvt. Ltd. and Delta Spokes Manufacturing Co., had imposed a lock‑out in violation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1

JOHN D’ SOUZAversusKARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

2019 INSC 114716 October 2019Case Partly allowed

John D’ Souza, a former bus conductor, was dismissed by Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation after a domestic enquiry that found him guilty of absenteeism. While an industrial dispute concerning his dismissal was pending before the Labour Court, the corporation sought permission to effectuate the dismissal under

K.D. DEWANversusHARBHAJAN S. PARIHAR

2001 INSC 51416 October 2001Dismissed

The appellant, K.D. Dewan, had occupied a residential premises in Chandigarh since 1965, initially paying rent to the father of the respondent and thereafter to the respondent, Harbhajan S. Parihar. The respondent filed an eviction application under Section 13(3)(a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949,

TATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD.versusTHEIR WORKMEN

1981 INSC 17916 October 1981Appeal(s) allowed

In a dispute between Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. and its workmen, two unions – the Telco Union (minority) and the Telco Kamgar Sanghatana (majority) – were involved. A settlement was reached on 7 February 1970 between the company and the Sanghatana and was signed by 564 of the 635 daily‑rated workers. The Te

STATE OF PUNJABversusLABOUR COURT, JULLUNDUR & ORS

1979 INSC 21016 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Hydel Upper Bari Doab Construction Project, undertaken by the Punjab Hydel Department, qualified as an "establishment" under Section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and whether the retrenchment of its workers entitled them to gratuity. It held that the project fell w

STATE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusNEELAM NAG

2016 INSC 87816 September 2016Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a senior assistant of State Bank of India, was alleged to have caused a loss of over Rs.44 lakh by facilitating fraudulent credit and misplacing clearing instruments in May 2006. A criminal case under Sections 409 and 34 of the IPC was filed in 2007, but the trial progressed slowly, with only three of e

M/S. TATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2013 INSC 62516 September 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Tata Iron & Steel Ltd. (Tata Steel) sold its cement division to Lafarge India under a Business Transfer Agreement, which purportedly transferred the employees to the buyer. The transferred workers later complained that they were forced to work for Lafarge without consent and sought to be taken back by Tata Steel, alleg

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusAJAY KUMAR SOOD

2022 INSC 83316 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a Division Bench judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court that affirmed a disciplinary dismissal of a bank employee but was written in an incomprehensible manner. The Court held that a judgment must be clear, logical and accessible to the parties and the public, and that incoherent judgmen

PFIZER LTD.versusMAZDOOR CONGRESS AND ORS.

1996 INSC 89216 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Pfizer Ltd., a pharmaceutical manufacturer, terminated two security staff members (respondents) after they were arrested for alleged theft, invoking its standing order for loss of confidence. The respondents filed complaints under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour

BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusSALIMBHAI UMARBHAI MANSURI

2013 INSC 47116 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was engaged as a daily‑wage helper for two fixed periods totaling 54 days, after which his service automatically terminated as per the contract. He raised an industrial dispute alleging that his termination amounted to retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking reinstatement with conti

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA WORKERS UNIONversusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 74616 July 1996Disposed off

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) had employed 464 handling mazdoors at its Siliguri depot, first through a contractor, then via a direct‑payment system, and later reverted to the contractor method. The workers, represented by their union, claimed that the re‑introduction of the contractor system was illegal and that

S. GANAPATHY AND ORS.versusAIR INDIA AND ANR.

1993 INSC 21916 June 1993Dismissed

The appellants, employees of Air India, were dismissed after disciplinary proceedings and were paid one month's salary reduced by Rs.10-15 for tax deducted under the West Bengal State Tax Act, 1979. Air India sought approval of the dismissal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which was rejecte

M/S CABLE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.versusADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR AND ORS.

2008 INSC 70216 May 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Mis Cable Corporation of India Ltd applied to retrench 280 workmen under s.25‑N(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Specified Authority allowed retrenchment of 276 workers but rejected the unions' applications under s.25‑N(6) for review or reference. The Bombay High Court, however, directed the authority to re

G.M. ONGC, SHILCHARversusONGC CONTRACTUAL WORKERS UNION

2008 INSC 70616 May 2008Dismissed

The Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) engaged a large number of workers through contractors for its drilling operations in Cachar. The ONGC Contractual Workers Union sought regularisation of these workers' services, leading the State Government to refer the dispute to an Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal held that

D.KRISHNAN & ANR.versusSPECIAL OFFICER, VELLORE CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR MILL & ANR.

2008 INSC 70716 May 2008Dismissed

The appellants, who were managers of a canteen in a sugar mill, claimed overtime wages and filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court allowed the claim on the basis of punch‑card records, but the High Court set aside the award, holding that Section 33C(2) is an exec

FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.versusPALA RAM & ORS.

2008 INSC 72116 May 2008Disposed off

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) had earlier been subject to a 1976 Central Government notification prohibiting the employment of contract labour for sweeping, cleaning, dusting and watching of its buildings. In 1992 the Central Government withdrew that prohibition, raising the question of whether the 1976 notificat

MOHD. ALIversusSTATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 34616 April 2018Dismissed

Mohd. Ali was employed as a casual labourer on a muster‑roll at an agricultural seed farm from 1980 to 1991, completing the statutory 240 days of work only in the years 1980‑1982 and 1986‑1989. He ceased work in 1991 without informing his employer. In 2005 he sought relief under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Ac

BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPN.versusT.V. ANANDAPPA

2009 INSC 54516 April 2009Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a Badli Conductor employed by Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation, was removed from the list of Badli Conductors in 1995 for alleged unauthorized absence. He later filed a claim under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which he withdrew, and subsequently raised a dispute under Sect

M/S. CREATIVE GARMENTS LTDversusKASHIRAM VERMA

2023 INSC 24316 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The employer, M/s. Creative Garments Ltd., appealed against a Labour Court award that reinstated employee Kashiram Verma with back wages. The employee never reported for duty despite multiple communications, and his permanent address was never furnished; only a "care of Union" address was provided. The Supreme Court fo

SEELAN RAJ AND ORS.versusTHE PRESIDING OFFICER 1ST ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 14916 March 2001Matter referred to larger bench

The Supreme Court examined an appeal arising from the closure of a data processing division of a computer services company. The central question was whether the activities of data processing and software preparation constitute a "manufacturing process" under Section 2(k) of the Factories Act, 1948, thereby rendering th

SANTURAM YADAV AND ANR.versusSECRETARY, KRISHI UPAJ M.S. SEMETARA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 10116 February 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Santuram Yadav and other daily‑wage workers were employed as Nakedar and, facing removal, entered into a compromise with their employer that provided for reinstatement and seniority from their first appointment. The Labour Court initially awarded reinstatement, but the workers were later dismissed again. Their claim fo

CEAT LTD.versusANAND ABASAHEB HAWALDAR AND ORS.

2006 INSC 8916 February 2006Appeal(s) allowed

CEAT Ltd. introduced a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS‑I) which 337 employees accepted, and later a second scheme (VRS‑II) under a Memorandum of Understanding which 179 employees accepted. Six former employees who had retired under VRS‑I alleged that the company committed an unfair labour practice by paying a Rs 90,00

L. ROBERT D'SOUZAversusTHE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SOUTHERN RAILWAY & ANR.

1982 INSC 2116 February 1982Appeal(s) allowed

L. Robert D'Souza, who had served continuously in Southern Railway since 1948, was transferred as punishment for union activities and later reinstated. In September 1974, while on a fast, he was deemed to have unauthorisedly absent himself and his service was terminated retrospectively from 18‑September 1974. He challe

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP. MANAGING DIRECTOR & ANR.versusRAMESH KUMAR SHARMA

2020 INSC 4716 January 2020Dismissed

Workmen filed a civil suit in 2005 seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against a fine imposed by Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. The corporation moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC to dismiss the suit and refer the matter to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The application a

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF SUDAMDIH COLLIERY OF M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.versusTHEIR WORKMEN REPRESENTED BY RASHTRIYA COLLIERY MAZDOOR SANGH

2006 INSC 2416 January 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two disputes referred by the Central Government under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, concerning whether workers engaged through a contractor at Sudamdh Colliery were to be treated as workmen of the principal employer, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. The Tribunal and the Patna High C

BHAGWATI PRASAD AND ORS.versusDELHI STATE MINERAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

1989 INSC 38815 December 1989Case Allowed

The petitioners, daily‑rated workers of the Delhi State Mineral Development Corporation appointed between 1983 and 1986, filed writ petitions under Article 32 seeking regularisation, equal pay with regular employees, and promotion. The Industrial Tribunal, after hearing both sides, held that the petitioners performed t

M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 68615 September 2011Disposed off

The case concerned 136 contract workers who had been employed as trolley retrievers at Delhi airports and sought regularisation after the Central Government’s 2004 notification under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (CLRAA) prohibited such contract labour in the Airports Authority of India (AAI)

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST K.R.T.C.versusDEVIDAS MANIKRAO SADANANDA

2006 INSC 62315 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

A driver employed by the Northeast Karnataka Road Transport Corporation collided his bus with the rear of another corporation bus while overtaking, causing the latter to strike a tree, injuring 56 passengers and killing four. The corporation’s disciplinary authority dismissed the driver, but the Labour Court set aside

STATE BANK'S STAFF UNION (MADRAS CIRCLE)versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 41915 September 2005Dismissed

The Central Government Industrial Tribunal awarded a customary bonus to State Bank of India employees, which the bank’s management challenged. While the award was pending, Parliament enacted the Banking Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984, inserting provisions in the State Bank Act and related statutes that prohibited any bonus

HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.versusASHOK VISHNU KATE AND ORS.

1995 INSC 57515 September 1995Dismissed

The predecessor of Hindustan Lever Ltd. served chargesheets on nine workmen who then filed complaints under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, alleging that the employer was engaging in unfair labour practices by initiating disciplinary proceedings that could lead

P.K. SINGH AND OTHERSversusPRESIDING OFFICER & OTHERS

1988 INSC 17615 July 1988Dismissed

Sixteen workmen employed as 'C' Grade Fitters in a Central Government undertaking filed applications under section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking computation of wages at the rate of 'B' Grade Fitters because they performed the same duties. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal‑cum‑Labour Cou

MANAGEMENT, PANDIYAN ROADWAYS CORP. LID.versusN. BALAKRISHNAN

2007 INSC 59115 May 2007Dismissed

The appellant, Management, Pandiya Roadways Corp. Ltd., dismissed its class‑IV employee N. Balakrishnan for alleged theft after a disciplinary enquiry found him guilty. The Labour Court refused to approve the dismissal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act because the employer had not complied with Clau

WORKMEN OF MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD. ETC. ETC.versusMEENAKSHI MILLS LTD. AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 16415 May 1992

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Section 25‑N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which requires prior governmental permission before an employer can retrench workmen in large establishments. The Court held that the right to retrench is an integral part of the employer’s Article 19(1)(g) right to c

PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.versusKARAMJIT SINGH

2019 INSC 52915 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Karamjit Singh, was initially appointed as a daily‑wage chowkidar and later regularized through an Office Order that allegedly interpolated his name into the final list of employees, despite not having the requisite three years of continuous service. The Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority (

STATE OF UTTARANCHALversusALOK SHARMA & ORS.

2009 INSC 50215 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether circular letters issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government in 1995 and 1996 could be treated as the "notified orders" required under the Uttar Pradesh Absorption of Retrenched Employees of Government of Public Corporations in Government Services Rules, 1991, which mandated a cut‑off date

S. GOVINDARAJUversusK.S.R.T.C. & ANR.

1986 INSC 7615 April 1986Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, selected as a conductor for the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, was appointed to a temporary vacancy and worked for more than 240 days. He was terminated under Regulation 10(5) of the Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (Cadre & Recruitment) Regulations 1982 on the ground of being unsuitable

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.versusDES SANDHU

2007 INSC 29915 March 2007Disposed off

Des Bandhu was appointed as a surveyor on 15 February 1988 and was terminated on 26 March 1989 without notice. He filed a civil suit for a declaration of continuance, which was dismissed, and his appeal was also dismissed in 1997. Subsequently, a reference under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusSUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 14515 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The U.P. State Road Transport Corporation removed driver Subhash Chandra Sharma from service for a serious misconduct involving intimidation of an assistant cashier while intoxicated. The Labour Court, after finding the departmental inquiry valid, substituted the removal with a lesser penalty of one wage‑increment stop

JITENDRA SINGH RATHORversusSHRI BAIDYANATH AYURVED BHAWAN LTD. & ANR.

1984 INSC 6115 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Jitendra Singh Rathor, a librarian, was terminated for misconduct and filed a complaint before the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal held that although misconduct was proved, termination was unwarranted and ordered reinstatement with half of the back wages. The emp

KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITYversusPRITHVI SINGH

2018 INSC 14315 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The University terminated security guard Prithvi Singh, a daily‑rated employee, after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for misbehaving with a research scholar. The Labour Court, on reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, held that the enquiry was illegal, treated the termination

G.M., B.S.N.L. & ORS.versusMAHESH CHAND

2008 INSC 20315 February 2008Case Allowed

Mahesh Chand, a workman, claimed that his termination in 1998 was illegal because he had continuously worked for more than 240 days in each calendar year from 1987 to 1998, invoking Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The employer, G.M., B.S.N.L. & Ors., contended that Chand was engaged on a purely tempo

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search