Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

771 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 401–600.

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CEMENT AND BUILDING MATERIALSversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

1996 INSC 25715 February 1996Dismissed

The National Council for Cement and Building Materials, a society, was challenged by its employees’ association to prepare certified standing orders under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. The society argued that it was not an “industry” within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMOTI LAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 26115 February 1996Dismissed

The respondents, who had been directly appointed as casual mates in Class III of the Northern Railway, were later regularised as gangmen (Class IV) by the railway authorities. They contended that their long‑term service as mates and the temporary status conferred upon them entitled them to be regularised as mates. The

RAJNEESH KHAJURIAversusM/S. WOCKHARDT LTD. & ANR.

2020 INSC 4315 January 2020Dismissed

Rajneesh Khajuria, a sales employee of Wockhardt Ltd., was transferred from Sagar to Mumbai and failed to report, after which his services were terminated. He filed a complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 alleging that the transfer and terminatio

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPN. LTD.versusASHOK RANGHBA AMBRE

2008 INSC 5215 January 2008Case Allowed

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (the appellant) had engaged Ashok Ranghba Ambre on a casual basis as a compounder/dresser from 1984. Ambre filed a writ petition in 1992 seeking to be declared a permanent employee with retrospective benefits. The corporation stopped employing him in 1996, leading to an industrial d

A.P.S.R.T.C. AND ANR.versusS. NARSAGOUD

2003 INSC 1715 January 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a conductor employed by Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was removed from service for two periods of unauthorized absence in 1982 and 1992. He raised a dispute under Section 2(A)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Labour Court reinstated him with continuity of service but w

MORGAN SECURITIES AND CREDIT PVT.LTDversusMODI RUBBER LTD.

2006 INSC 100614 December 2006Dismissed

Morgan Securities advanced an inter‑corporate deposit to Modi Rubber, which defaulted, leading to an arbitral award in favour of Morgan and a winding‑up petition. The High Court restrained Modi Rubber from dealing with its assets, but the company made a reference to the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.versusMAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION AND ORS.

1998 INSC 47814 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. submitted draft standing orders for certification under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. The draft was partially certified, and the clause on representation of a workman in disciplinary proceedings was left unmodified, thereby retaining the Model Standing Orders p

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusRAMESHWAR LAL GAHLOT

1995 INSC 89514 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent was appointed on a temporary basis for three months or until a regular incumbent assumed office, but his appointment was terminated after 240 days. A writ petition challenged the termination, and a Single Judge held that the termination violated Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, ordering

STATE BANK OF INDIAversusRAM CHANDRA DUBEY AND ORS.

2000 INSC 52014 November 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Government referred a dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to an Industrial Tribunal to determine whether the termination of 26 State Bank of India employees was justified and what relief they were entitled to. The Tribunal awarded reinstatement but was silent on back wages. The emp

MODI INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

1993 INSC 33514 October 1993Appeal(s) allowed

Modi Industries Ltd. (the appellant) operated a manufacturing unit where a dispute between management and trade unions led to a halt in production from 21 December 1990 to 3 March 1991. The company refused to pay wages for this period, prompting the Additional Labour Commissioner to issue a notice under Section 3 of th

BRIJBHUSHAN YADAV AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2007 INSC 91514 September 2007Disposed off

Workmen were initially engaged as security guards through an agency on 1 Oct 1996. After the agency contract expired on 1 Oct 1997, they continued to work for the Telecom Department until 31 May 1999. Claiming that they had rendered continuous service of more than 240 days, they sought reinstatement and back wages unde

UNION OF INDIAversusSHREE SHANKAR TEXTILES EX-EMPLOYEES UNION AND ORS.

2007 INSC 92614 September 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Shree Shankar Textiles Ex‑Employees Union sought benefits under the Textile Workers Rehabilitation Fund Scheme (TWRFS) 1991, contending that the scheme’s requirement that a mill be closed under Section 25‑O of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (or have an official liquidator appointed) violated Articles 14 and 16 o

D. P. MAHESHWARIversusDELHI ADMN. & ORS.

1983 INSC 12014 September 1983Appeal(s) allowed

D.P. Maheshwari was terminated from his employment in 1969 and raised an industrial dispute that was referred to the Additional Labour Court under sections 10(1)(c) and 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court examined the evidence and held that Maheshwari was a "workman" under section 2(s) because his du

ASST. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EPFO, BAREILLYM/S U.P. STATE WAREHOUSING CORP. & ANR.versusM/S U.P. STATE WAREHOUSING CORP. & ANR.

2019 INSC 90314 August 2019Remitted to Lower Court

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner issued a notice under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, demanding that the Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation pay EPF contributions for 159 workers who performed loading and unloading in its godowns through contractors

DISTRICT RED CROSS SOCIETYversusBABITA ARORA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 83114 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The District Red Cross Society closed its Maternity Hospital due to financial constraints, terminating the services of staff nurses including Babita Arora, while other units such as a Drug De‑Addiction Centre, Family Planning Centre and Viklang Kendra continued to operate. The employees claimed protection under Section

J. JAISHANKARversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 88914 August 1996Dismissed

The petitioner, a government employee, was convicted under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code and fined Rs.200, a conviction that was final and involved moral turpitude. He sought a reference to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to contest his dismissal. The High Court init

JAGBIR SINGHversusHARYANA STATE AGRICULTURE MARKETING BOARD & ANR.

2009 INSC 90614 July 2009Case Partly allowed

Jagbir Singh was engaged as a daily wager by the Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board from 1 September 1995 until his termination on 18 July 1996. He alleged that the termination violated Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sought reinstatement with back wages. The Labour Court awarded reinstateme

GENERAL MANAGER, HARYANA ROADWAYSversusRUDHAN SINGH

2005 INSC 29214 July 2005Case Partly allowed

The respondent, Rudhan Singh, was employed on a daily‑wage, class IV basis by Haryana Roadways from 16 March 1988 to 28 February 1989 with intermittent breaks. His services were terminated without notice or retrenchment compensation and he later demanded reinstatement. The State Government referred the dispute to the I

GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.versusSRI VIKRAM CHAUDHARY AND ORS.

1995 INSC 40114 July 1995Disposed off

The Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) engaged several workers on daily‑wage contracts for its development projects. The workers filed a writ petition seeking regularisation of their services and parity in pay with regular employees. The Allahabad High Court single judge denied regularisation but directed the GDA to

N.S. GIRIversusCORPORATION OF CITY OF MANGALORE & ORS.

1999 INSC 25514 May 1999Dismissed

N.S. Giri, an Assistant Health Officer of Mangalore City Municipality, was governed by Rule 48 of the Karnataka Municipalities (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1972 which fixed the superannuation age at 55 years. An industrial dispute concerning whether the retirement age should be raised to 58 years was referred to arbi

RAJASTHAN STATE TPT CORPN. & ANR.versusBAJRANG LAL

2014 INSC 19214 March 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (the Corporation) appealed against judgments that had upheld a civil suit filed by its former trainee conductor, Bajrang Lal, challenging his removal from service for alleged embezzlement. The lower courts had found that the disciplinary enquiry violated principles of natu

HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.versusASSOCIATION OF ENGINEERING WORKERS

2008 INSC 36914 March 2008Dismissed

The Association of Engineering Workers filed a complaint under Item 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, alleging that Hindalco Industries treated its canteen staff as contract workers to avoid granting permanency and benefits. The Industri

LIC OF INDIAversusR. SURESH

2008 INSC 37814 March 2008Dismissed

R. Suresh, a Development Officer of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), was dismissed after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of negligence, though he was cleared of breach of trust and forgery. He raised an industrial dispute before an Industrial Tribunal under s.11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 19

MANAGER, R.B.I., BANGALOREversusS. MANI AND ORS.

2005 INSC 13814 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) terminated a group of temporary workers known as "Ticca Mazdoors" who had been employed between 1980 and 1982 after alleging they produced forged certificates; they were later acquitted in criminal trials. In 1987‑88 they sought re‑employment, were refused, and raised an industrial dispu

VINOD RAVJIBHAI RAJPUTversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2020 INSC 19114 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Vinod Ravjibhai Rajput was first appointed as a part‑time Gallery Attendant in 1995 and later as a full‑time attendant in July 2002. He was terminated in 2004 on a policy ground, reverted to part‑time, and again terminated in December 2012 for not meeting conditions of a 2007 government resolution. The Gujarat High Cou

MANAGEMENT OF M/S. SONEPAT COOPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusAJIT SINGH

2005 INSC 7714 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Management of M/s. Sonepat Co‑operative Sugar Mills Ltd., terminated the services of Ajit Singh, who was employed as a Legal Assistant. Singh claimed that he was a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sought reinstatement with back wages. The Labour Court and the Punjab &

M/S. OSWAL AGRO FURANE LTD. AND ANR.versusOSWAL AGRO FURANE WORKERS UNION AND ORS.

2005 INSC 7814 February 2005Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether an employer could close an industrial undertaking and retrench workmen without obtaining prior permission from the appropriate Government, and whether a settlement reached between the parties could override the statutory requirements of Sections 25‑N and 25‑0 of the Industrial Dispute

THE SECRETARY, INDIAN TEA ASSOCIATIONversusAJIT KUMAR BARAT AND ORS.

2000 INSC 6714 February 2000

Ajit Kumar Barat, a Joint Secretary of the Indian Tea Association, was dismissed for refusing a transfer. He sought relief under Section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and a failure report recommended that the dispute over whether he was a "workman" be referred to an industrial tribunal. The West Bengal Gover

GENERAL MANAGER, SECURITY PAPER MILL, HOSHANGABADversusR.S. SHARMA & ORS.

1986 INSC 1614 February 1986Dismissed

In 1973 a settlement was reached during conciliation between the management of Security Paper Mill and the SPM Employees Union covering incentive benefits for all workmen and non‑operative staff. The Government later reduced the incentive rates, a decision later held illegal, after which the management entered into a s

K.V.S. RAMversusBANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION

2015 INSC 3814 January 2015

The appellant, a driver employed by Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation since 1985, was charged in 1990 with securing his appointment by a false transfer certificate. An enquiry was initiated in 1992 but the report was only submitted in 2002, leading to a dismissal order in 2004. The appellant challenged the d

V. VEERARAJAN & ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

1987 INSC 1114 January 1987Appeal(s) allowed

A large number of workmen of Lucas‑T.V.S. Ltd. were dismissed for alleged misconduct; seven of them raised disputes under s.11‑A of the Industrial Disputes Act after conciliation failed. The Tamil Nadu Government refused to refer the disputes to the Labour Court, citing the fairness of the domestic inquiry, the nature

MANAGEMENT OF SUNDARAM INDUSTRIES LTD.versusSUNDARAM INDUSTRIES EMPLOYEES UNION

2013 INSC 83313 December 2013Dismissed

The appellant, Sundaram Industries Ltd., directed its moulders to place production bags on an electronic weighing scale after their shift, which required extra effort and time without additional pay. Thirteen moulders refused, were suspended and later dismissed for alleged misconduct, persistent disobedience and insubo

GANAPATI BHIKARAO NAIKversusNUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED

2024 INSC 87113 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed

Ganapati Bhikarao Naik, the son‑in‑law of a land‑loser whose land was acquired for the Kaiga Atomic Power Project, was appointed as a helper under a rehabilitation scheme. After marital discord and a divorce proceeding, his father‑in‑law alleged that Naik was not a legitimate family member and the employer terminated h

BALWANT RAI SALUJA & ANR. ETC. ETC.versusAIR INDIA LTD. & ORS.

2013 INSC 75513 November 2013Matter referred to larger bench

The workmen employed in the canteen of Air India, which was operated by Chef Air, a unit of the Hotel Corporation of India (HCI), claimed they were regular employees of Air India. Air India argued that HCI was a separate legal entity and that it had no control over the workers' hiring, wages, or discipline. The Supreme

STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMAN SINGH

2006 INSC 60013 September 2006Case Partly allowed

Man Singh was appointed as a temporary conductor by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation on 20 July 1974 and was terminated on 23 July 1975 for alleged misconduct. He raised an industrial dispute on 14 September 1986, more than a decade after his termination. The Labour Court held that the corporation had not comp

RAJASTHAN STATE GANGANAGAR S. MILLS LTD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

2004 INSC 51613 September 2004Leave Granted & Disposed off

Bhagwan Das, a daily‑wages worker, claimed that he was employed continuously from 1 March 1990 to 15 July 1992 and that his termination amounted to retrenchment under Sections 25(F), (G) and (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which require at least 240 days of work in the preceding twelve months. The employer co

SYNDICATE BANK AND ANR. ETC. ETCversusSH. K. UMESH NAYAK ETC. ETC.

1994 INSC 38513 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether bank employees on strike were entitled to wages for the strike period. It held that entitlement to wages requires the strike to be both legal and justified, and that questions of legality and justifiability are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the industrial adjudicator under the

CALCUTTA PORT SHARMIK UNIONversusCALCUTTA RIVER TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION & ORS.

1988 INSC 27513 September 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The Calcutta Port Sharmik Union, representing about 15,000 bargemen (Dandees and Majhis) at Calcutta Port, claimed that they were "dock workers" under the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment) Act, 1948 and therefore entitled to the wages and allowances recommended by the Central Wage Board. The Wage Board had exclud

NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD.versusKARRI POTHURAJU AND ORS.

2003 INSC 38613 August 2003Dismissed

National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC), a public sector undertaking, was statutorily obligated under Section 46 of the Factories Act, 1948 to provide a canteen for its employees. The canteen was operated by contractors, employing about 54 workers. The workers filed a writ petition seeking regularisation as NTPC

RAJASTHAN TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ANR.versusINTEJAM ALI ZAFRI

2006 INSC 42913 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., terminated the services of the respondent, a casual house‑assistant, who claimed to have completed 240 days of continuous service. The Labour Court, relying on the respondent’s claim, awarded reinstatement and back wages under Section 25(F) of the Industria

HUDAversusJAGMAL SINGH

2006 INSC 43013 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a sweeper employer, dismissed the respondent, a daily‑wage sweeper, who after four and a half years filed a demand for reinstatement with back wages. The employer contended that the respondent had not completed the statutory 240 days of work in any year, a condition for a person to be deemed a “workman”

RAJ KUMARversusDIRECTOR OF EDUCATION & ORS.

2016 INSC 31813 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent driver at DAV Public School, was declared surplus and retrenched by the school’s Managing Committee in 2003. The school served a notice under Section 25F(a) of the Industrial Disputes Act but failed to send the statutory notice to the appropriate government authority under Section 25F(c) and

SARVA SHRAMIK SANGHversusINDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

2009 INSC 48613 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Sarva Shramik Sangh, representing canteen workers employed by a contractor of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), first filed a writ petition seeking abolition of the contract labour system under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, which was dismissed for want of prosecution. It then filed a second

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusINTERNATIONAL AIR CARGO WORKERS UNION & ANR.

2009 INSC 48313 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The International Airport Authority of India (IAAI) terminated a licence with a private ground‑handling firm, after which the firm’s workers formed a cooperative society and entered into a contract‑labour agreement with IAAI. The workers later sought absorption as regular employees, alleging that the contract was a sha

MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusMAHADEO KRISHNA NAIK

2025 INSC 21813 February 2025Disposed off

Mahadeo Krishna Naik, a bus driver for Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC), was dismissed after a fatal accident in 1996. The Labour Court upheld his dismissal, but the corporation later obtained a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) award that placed sole blame on the lorry driver, a fact it failed

DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, G.S.R.T.C.versusKADARBHAI J. SUTHAR

2007 INSC 13513 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a driver for the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation, caused a fatal accident; he was acquitted in the criminal trial but the corporation dismissed him after departmental proceedings found him guilty of misconduct. The Labour Court reinstated him without back wages, citing the acquittal, but the Hi

U.P. STATE BRIDGE CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.versusU.P. RAJYA SETU NIGAM S. KARAMCHARI SANGH

2004 INSC 10913 February 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. terminated the services of 168 muster‑roll employees after they remained absent for more than ten consecutive days, invoking Clause L‑2.12 of its Certified Standing Orders. The employees, represented by a union, filed writ petitions under Article 226 challenging the termination. T

INDIAN BANKS ASSOCIATIONversusWORKMEN OF SYNDICATE BANK AND ORS.

2001 INSC 8513 February 2001Dismissed

The Indian Banks Association and several nationalised banks challenged an Industrial Tribunal award that classified deposit collectors and commission agents as workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and ordered back wages, gratuity and other benefits. The banks argued that the collectors were engaged on a pur

RAMESH KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2010 INSC 4113 January 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Ramesh Kumar was appointed on a casual basis as a Mali in the Haryana Public Works Department in December 1991 and was terminated on 31 January 1993 without any notice or retrenchment compensation. He claimed that he had worked more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months, invoking the protection of Section 25F of the

V.V.G. REDDYversusAPSRTC, NIZAMABAD REGION & ANR.

2009 INSC 2513 January 2009Dismissed

V.V.G. Reddy, a bus conductor employed by the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was dismissed following disciplinary proceedings. The Labour Court, on a consent award, ordered his reinstatement with continuity of service but expressly denied back wages and attendant benefits. Reddy sought notional increm

AHMEDABAD PVT. PRIMARY TEACHERS' ASSOCIATIONversusADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

2004 INSC 3213 January 2004Dismissed

A teacher employed by a municipal school sought gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but the Gujarat High Court held that teachers are not "employees" within the meaning of section 2(e) and dismissed the claim. The Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers' Association appealed, arguing that the definition of emp

D.N. KRISHNAPPAversusTHE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER

2022 INSC 127312 December 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a workman dismissed from a bank in 1996, obtained a reinstatement award with back wages from the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) dated 18 July 2007. The award was stayed by the High Court and only confirmed after the dismissal of writ appeals on 12 July 2013, after which the appellant was r

M.D. BALASAHEB DESAI SAHAKARI S.K. LTD.versusKASHINATH GANAPATI KAMBALE

2008 INSC 142412 December 2008Case Partly allowed

The respondent, a peon employed since 1974, was dismissed in 1984 for multiple instances of misconduct including unauthorized absences, late attendance, leaving the premises without permission, and falsifying the muster roll. He sought reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages before the Labour Court

M/S. HONDARAM RAMCHANDRAversusYESHWANT MAHADEV KADAM (DEAD) THROUGH LRS.

2007 INSC 128112 December 2007Disposed off

The appellant, Mis. Hondaram Ramchandra, operated a sales office which was closed. The workmen were transferred to a separate factory, refused to join, and were terminated after an ex parte domestic enquiry. The Labour Court upheld the termination, but the High Court set aside the award and ordered reinstatement with b

J.K. SYNTHETICSversusRAJASTHAN TRADE UNION KENDRA AND ORS.

2000 INSC 59112 December 2000Disposed off

JK Synthtics Ltd. laid off its workers in 1983 due to a total power cut and subsequently terminated 1,164 workers and retrenched 1,201 workers, prompting the Rajasthan Trade Union Kendra to challenge the terminations before the High Court and an Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal, after a secret poll, held that the lay‑

SULTAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1995 INSC 88512 December 1995Disposed off

The appellant, a workman, was terminated and his demand for reinstatement was rejected. He applied to the State Government for a reference of the dispute under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; the first application was refused and a second application was also rejected on the ground that the earlier

WORKMEN OF HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ANR.versusHINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. AND ORS.

1984 INSC 23712 December 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the dismissal of an assistant of Hindustan Steel Ltd. who was removed from service under Standing Order 32 on the ground that his continued employment was "inexpedient". The employer dispensed with the disciplinary enquiry prescribed in Standing Order 31 and did not record any specific reason

GRINDLAYS BANK LTD.versusCENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AND ORS.

1980 INSC 23312 December 1980Dismissed

The Central Government referred an industrial dispute between Grindlays Bank Ltd. and its workmen to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal under s.10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. After several adjournments, the Tribunal refused a further adjournment on 9 December 1976 and passed an ex‑parte award, relying

THE REGIONAL MANAGER, APSRTCversusN. SATYANARAYANA AND ORS.

2007 INSC 113312 November 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents were appointed as conductors on a daily‑wage basis and were later regularized on 1 August 1987. In 1999 they filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking regularization retroactive to their initial appointment date, without explaining the long delay. The High Court allowed the petition, relying on th

P. KARUPAIAH (D) THRversusTHE GENERAL MANAGER THRUUVALLUVAR TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD.

2017 INSC 103512 October 2017Dismissed

P. Karupiah, a driver employed by the General Manager Thiruvalluvar Transport Corporation Ltd., was dismissed after being convicted in a murder case, but was later acquitted by the High Court and reinstated. The employer refused to pay back wages for the period of dismissal, prompting the employee to file a writ petiti

SIEMENS LTD. & ANOTHERversusSIEMENS EMPLOYEES UNION & ANOTHER

2011 INSC 75412 October 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Siemens Ltd. issued a 2007 notification inviting workmen to apply for a two‑year Officer Trainee programme, after which successful candidates would be designated as Junior Executive Officers. The Siemens Employees Union alleged that this scheme violated clause 7 of a 1982 settlement (prohibiting officers from doing nor

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR.versusPRANTIYA SINCHAI AVAM BANDH YOGANA SHRAMIK MAHAPARISHAD

2007 INSC 105412 October 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Fourteen daily‑wage workers in the Uttarakhand Irrigation Department had worked for more than six years, completing at least 240 days each calendar year. The Labour Court ordered their regularisation, but the Uttarakhand High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the workers were entitled to regularisation. O

K.C.P. LIMITEDversusTHE PRESIDING OFFICER AND ORS.

1996 INSC 104212 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

K.C.P. Ltd. dismissed 29 workmen after disciplinary action during a strike. The recognised trade union (respondent No.2) raised an industrial dispute under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act on behalf of all 29 workmen and later entered into a settlement under Section 18(1) offering either reinstatement withou

SARDAR DILSHAR SINGHversusTHE LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND ANR.

1995 INSC 56212 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, a partner in a firm, was subject to a Labour Court certificate directing the District Collector to recover Rs. 62,843.50 as arrears of land revenue under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. When a bailiff attempted to attach his movable property, the appellant promised to appear before the Collector but f

SATYAVIR SINGH AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS. ETC. ETC.

1985 INSC 19612 September 1985Dismissed

The appellants, employees of the Research and Analysis Wing, were dismissed under clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution and Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, without a charge‑sheet or inquiry, after a violent pen‑down strike and inti

DEEPALI GUNDU SURWASEversusKRANTI JUNIOR ADHYAPAK MAHAVIDYALAYA (D.ED.) AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 52912 August 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a teacher in a private aided school, refused to contribute to a tax demand and was suspended and later terminated without proper approval or a fair inquiry, violating the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Act, 1977 and principles of natural justice. The School Tribunal quas

DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusSARDAR SINGH

2004 INSC 44212 August 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) dismissed several conductors, including Sardar Singh, for long periods of unauthorized absence, invoking Paragraphs 4(ii) and 19(h) of the Delhi Road Transport Authority (Conditions of Appointment and Service) Regulations, 1952. The employees sought approval of the dismissals under

DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusSHYAM LAL

2004 INSC 44412 August 2004Case Partly allowed

The respondent, Shyam Lal, a conductor for Delhi Transport Corporation, was found to have collected fare without issuing tickets and, after departmental proceedings, admitted his guilt and was removed from service. The employer sought approval of the removal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, but th

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC.ETC.versusPIARA SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 20112 August 1992Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals by the States of Punjab and Haryana against a Punjab‑Haryana High Court judgment that ordered the regularisation of large numbers of ad‑hoc, temporary, work‑charged, daily‑wage and casual labour employees. The petitioners argued that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction by amendi

M/S. AMRIT VANASPATL CO.LTD.versusKHEM CHAND AND ANR.

2006 INSC 42212 July 2006Disposed off

The case involved a workman (Respondent No. I) who was dismissed for threatening senior officers and inciting a strike. The Labour Court found the domestic inquiry defective but allowed the employer to adduce fresh evidence, ultimately upholding the dismissal. The High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction, set aside the

HINDUSTAN MOTORS LTD.versusTAPAN KUMAR BHATTACHARYA AND ANR.

2002 INSC 30012 July 2002Disposed off

The workman, Tapan Kumar Bhattacharya, assaulted his supervisor in 1980, was suspended, found guilty of major misconduct in a departmental enquiry and dismissed. The employer sought approval of the dismissal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Industrial Tribunal initially approved it.

FICUS PAX PRIVATE LTD. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 42512 June 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined challenges by private employers, including Ficus Pax Private Ltd., to central and state orders issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 that compelled private establishments to pay full wages to all workers during the COVID‑19 lockdown. The petitioners argued that the orders were ultra‑

DIVISIONAL MANAGER, RAJASTHAN S.R.T.C.versusKAMRUDDIN

2009 INSC 79312 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Kamruddin, a bus conductor employed on probation by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, was caught five times for not issuing tickets to passengers. After a warning, a disciplinary enquiry was held, found him guilty, and terminated his services. The Labour Court, invoking Section 11A of the Industrial Dispu

THE GENERAL SECRETARY, SOUTH INDIAN CASHEW FACTORLES WORKER'S UNIONversusTHE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CASHEW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 32712 May 2006Dismissed

The South Indian Cashew Factories Workers' Union challenged the domestic enquiry and subsequent reversion of a manager, S. Sivasankara Pillai, for alleged misconduct. The enquiry was conducted by the corporation's Assistant Personnel Manager, who found the employee guilty and recommended reversion to clerk. The Labour

STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPURversusOM PRAKASH SHARMA

2006 INSC 34012 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Om Prakash Sharma, a casual worker of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, was terminated after three and a half months and replaced by a junior employee. He raised an industrial dispute and the appropriate Government referred the question of whether his termination violated Section 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 194

NORTH EASTERN KARNATAKA R.T. CORPORATIONversusASHAPPA AND ANR.

2006 INSC 34112 May 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Ashappa, a conductor employed by North Eastern Karnataka Road Transport Corporation, was absent without authorization for more than three years between November 1990 and December 1993 and repeatedly failed to report to duty despite notices. A departmental proceeding dismissed him for misconduct. He rais

INDIAN NUT PRODUCTS AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

1994 INSC 20412 May 1994

The Kerala Government, invoking the Kerala Cashew Factories (Acquisition) Act, 1974, issued a common notice to 36 cashew factories stating they were closed and would cause large‑scale unemployment, and subsequently declared the factories transferred to the State. The owners, who were also occupiers, challenged the noti

M/S CIPLA LTD. AND ORS.versusRIPU DAMAN BHANOT AND ANR.

1999 INSC 17612 April 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Cipla Ltd. terminated medical representative Ripu Daman Bhanot after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of submitting a false daily report, a misconduct under Rule 14 of the company's service rules. The Labour Court held the termination illegal, reasoning that Bhanot was denied assistance of an advocate and that t

G.S. KAUSHIK AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 50812 April 1996Disposed off

The All India Regional Rural Bank Employees Association and the All India Gramin Bank Workers Organisation filed writ petitions seeking pay parity between Regional Rural Bank (RRB) employees and those of nationalised commercial banks. A National Industrial Tribunal awarded that RRB employees be placed on the same pay s

MAHANADI COALFIELDS LTD.versusBRAJRAJNAGAR COAL MINES WORKERS’ UNION

2024 INSC 19912 March 2024

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. (the appellant) had engaged a contractor to transport crushed coal, employing 32 workmen from 1984 to 1994. The workers' union sought regularisation of all 32 workers under clauses of the National Coal Wage Agreement IV, leading to a settlement on 5 April 1997 that regularised only 19 of them,

STATE OF UTTARANCHAL & ANR.versusSUNIL KUMAR SINGH NEGI

2008 INSC 34712 March 2008Disposed off

Sunil Kumar Singh Negi, a daily‑wage worker of the Uttarakhand Horticulture Department, was ordered by the Labour Court in 2001 to be reinstated and to receive back wages of Rs 6,000. The Department sent a letter asking him to join work at the Fruit Preservation Centre, Pauri, but he did not report and instead filed a

AHMEDABAD MANUFACTURING & CALICO PRINTING CO. LTD.versusWORKMEN & ANR.

1981 INSC 6612 March 1981Appeal(s) allowed

The Industrial Tribunal awarded a decision against Ahmedabad Manufacturing & Calico Printing Co. Ltd., which the company challenged by filing a special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. The company later withdrew that petition, and four days thereafter filed a writ petition under Article 226 in the

SARVA SHRAMIK SANGH, BOMBAYversusINDIAN HUME PIPE CO. LTD. AND ANR.

1993 INSC 5512 February 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The Sarva Shramik Sangh, a labour union, sought dearness allowance for daily‑rated workers at the same rate as monthly‑rated workers, retrospectively from 15 November 1965. After failed conciliation in 1965‑67, the union reiterated the demand in a 26 April 1968 memorandum, leading to a government reference to the Indus

SMT. K. A. ANNAMMAversusTHE SECRETARY, COCHIN CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL SOCIETY LTD.

2018 INSC 2612 January 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The employee of a Kerala co‑operative hospital was dismissed and challenged the termination before the Labour Court under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act). The Labour Court set aside the dismissal, but the employer obtained a writ setting aside the award. The Supreme Court examined whether a service dispute b

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION --I & ANR.versusBAL MUKUND BAIRWA

2009 INSC 1412 January 2009Reference answered

The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (a State corporation) terminated several employees and the employees filed civil suits alleging violation of natural‑justice principles and statutory regulations. The Supreme Court was asked to resolve a conflict between earlier judgments on whether civil courts have juris

DUSHYANT JANBANDHUversusM/S HYUNDAI AUTOEVER INDIA PVT. LTD.

2024 INSC 96611 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, an assistant manager, was terminated by the respondent employer alleging absenteeism, after a show‑cause notice and disciplinary inquiry. The appellant filed a petition under Section 15(2) of the Payment of Wages Act for unpaid wages and later approached the Industrial Tribunal under Section 2(A) of the

B.S.N.L.versusBHURUMAL

2013 INSC 82111 December 2013Disposed off

The respondent, Bhurumal, claimed that he had worked as a daily‑wage lineman for BSNL for about 15 years, suffered an electric shock on duty and was subsequently denied reinstatement, alleging illegal termination under section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Industrial Tribunal and the High Court held tha

M/S SAVITA CHEMICALS (PVT.) LTD.versusDYES AND CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION AND ANR.

1998 INSC 47611 December 1998Dismissed

The appellant, Savita Chemicals Ltd., sought a declaration that a strike by the Dyes and Chemical Workers Union was illegal under Sections 24(1)(a) and 24(1)(i) of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The union had issued a strike notice during the subsistence o

COLLECTOR SINGHversusL.M.L. LTD., KANPUR

2014 INSC 76911 November 2014Appeal(s) allowed

Collector Singh, a semi‑skilled workman, was dismissed by L.M.L. Ltd. after a departmental inquiry found him guilty of throwing jute/cotton waste balls at a foreman and allegedly using abusive language. The Labour Court upheld the dismissal, relying on the appellant's apology letter, and the High Court affirmed that aw

VISHWESHWARAIAH IRON AND STEEL LTD.versusABDUL GANI AND ORS.

1997 INSC 72511 November 1997Directions issued

The case involved the termination of an employee by Vishweshwaraiah Iron and Steel Ltd. without conducting a domestic enquiry. The employee challenged the termination before the labour court, which upheld the termination based on evidence later led before the Court of Reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disput

NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusSHRI SHRI KISHAN BHAGERIA & OTHERS

1987 INSC 32811 November 1987Dismissed

The appellant, National Engineering Industries Ltd., dismissed Shri Kishan Bhageria, an internal auditor, after alleging unauthorised absence. Bhageria claimed salary arrears under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the employer contended that he was not a “workman” within the meaning of section 2

T .P. SRIVASTAVAversusNATIONAL TOBACCO CO. OF INDIA LTD ..

1991 INSC 26011 October 1991Dismissed

T.P. Srivastava, employed as a Section Salesman by National Tobacco Co., was terminated in July 1973 for alleged unauthorized absence. The Government of Rajasthan referred the matter to the Labour Court to determine whether the termination was lawful and whether Srivastava qualified as a "workman" under the Industrial

RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS.versusLAXMAN LAL ETC. ETC.

1990 INSC 31811 October 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan State Electricity Board (RSEB) and its employees entered into a first settlement on 22‑Feb‑1972 fixing pay‑scale No. 3 for Meter Readers/Checkers, later clarified by a second settlement on 2‑Dec‑1972 that created two grades (I and II) with different scales. The High Court quashed the second settlement and

MIHIR KUMAR HAZARA CHOUDHURYversusLIFE INSURANCE CORPN. & ANR.

2017 INSC 88111 September 2017Dismissed

M.K. Hazra Chowdhury, an Assistant of Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC), was found to have issued premium receipts to policyholders without actually receiving the premiums. He admitted the act in his reply, citing workload and family pressures, and sought leniency. A departmental enquiry under Regulation 39 of

TRIVENI ENGINEERING & INDUST. LTD.versusJASWANT SINGH & ANR.

2010 INSC 49811 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Jaswant Singh, an employee of Triveni Engineering, was transferred to another sugar mill and terminated when he did not report to the new location. He claimed to be a "workman" under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act and challenged the transfer and termination via a writ petition. The High Court dismissed his petition,

H.R. ADYANTHAYAversusSANDOZ (INDIA) LTD.

1994 INSC 31311 August 1994

The Supreme Court examined whether medical representatives employed by Sandoz (India) Ltd. qualified as "workmen" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The Court held that the work of a medical represent

UNION OF INDIA ETC.versusTHE UNITED PLANTERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN INDIA ETC. & ORS.

2022 INSC 67311 July 2022Disposed off

The Union of India moved several transfer petitions under Article 139A of the Constitution seeking to shift more than 140 writ petitions, pending in 18 High Courts, that challenge the constitutional validity of the Payment of Bonus (Amendment) Act, 2015. The petitions argued that the amendments – which raised salary th

RAJASTHAN LALIT KALA ACADEMYversusRADHEY SHYAM

2008 INSC 81011 July 2008Case Partly allowed

The respondent, Radhey Shyam, was employed as a junior clerk by Rajasthan Lalit Kala Academy and was terminated in 1981 without complying with the notice and compensation requirements of Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act. He raised an industrial dispute; the Labour Court ordered his reinstatement with back‑wa

STATE OF HARYANAversusRAMESH KUMAR

2008 INSC 81511 July 2008Disposed off

The respondent, a workman in the Public Works Department, was terminated on 31 March 1993. The Labour Court held the termination illegal, finding that he had completed the requisite 240 days of service in the preceding year. The State of Haryana appealed, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the writ petitio

R.S.R.T.C. AND ORS.versusRAMDHARA INDOLIYA

2006 INSC 41711 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Ramdhara Indoliya, was employed as a daily‑wage conductor by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (RSRTC) and was terminated. He filed a suit in a civil court seeking reinstatement, back wages and other relief. The civil court and the High Court ruled in his favour, but RSRTC appealed to the S

AIR INDIA CABIN CREW ASSOCIATIONversusYESHAWINEE MERCHANT AND ORS.

2003 INSC 30911 July 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The dispute concerned the retirement age and service conditions of air hostesses employed by Air India and Indian Airlines, who under various agreements were required to retire from flying duties at age 50 (later 45/50) with the option of ground duties up to age 58, while male cabin crew could serve until 58. A small g

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHERversusTULSIRAM PATEL AND OTHERS

1985 INSC 15511 July 1985Disposed off

This Constitution Bench judgment interprets the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, which allows dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of a civil servant without an inquiry in three exceptional circumstances: conviction on a criminal charge, when it is not reasonably practicable to hold an

CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,THE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRANVANCORE LTD. & ANR.versusGENERAL SECRETARY FACT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ORS.

2019 INSC 51411 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Government directed the public sector undertaking FACT to reduce the retirement age of pre‑1978 employees from 60 to 58 years. Trade unions challenged the order in the Kerala High Court; the Single Judge and the Division Bench dismissed the petitions and the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitio

DEVINDER SINGHversusMUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SANAUR

2011 INSC 29311 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Devinder Singh was engaged by the Municipal Council, Sanaur as a clerk on a contract basis from August 1994 and his services were terminated on 30 September 1996 without the notice or compensation required under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court awarded him reinstatement, but the Punja

SHARAD KUMARversusGOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.

2002 INSC 19111 April 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Sharad Kumar, employed as an Area Sales Executive, was terminated without a show‑cause notice or enquiry. The dispute was referred to conciliation, and the Delhi Government refused to refer it to an Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court, stating that Kumar was not a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANKversusI.O.B. STAFF CANTEEN WORKERS UNION AND ANR.

2000 INSC 21311 April 2000Dismissed

The Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) provided a staff canteen from 1973, initially through a contractor and later via a co‑operative society run by bank employees. The bank supplied premises, equipment, subsidies and other support, while the canteen workers were paid from these funds. When the canteen was closed in 1990, the

RAM AVTAR SHARMA & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC.

1985 INSC 8611 April 1985Case Allowed

The petitioners, workmen dismissed after domestic enquiries, raised industrial disputes and sought reinstatement. Conciliation failed and the State of Haryana (for four workmen) and the Central Government (for one workman) refused to refer the disputes to an Industrial Tribunal under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Dis

CHAUHARYA TRIPATHI & ORS.versusL.L.C. OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 95011 March 2015Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by several Development Officers of the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) challenging a High Court order that set aside an award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. The core issue was whether these Development Officers qualified as "workmen" under Section 2(s) of the In

UCO BANK AND ORS.versusSANWAR MAL

2004 INSC 16411 March 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sanwar Mal, a former Class‑IV employee of UCO Bank who resigned in 1988, sought to join the bank's Employees' Pension Scheme introduced in 1995 under a 1993 settlement. The bank refused, invoking Regulation 22 which disqualifies any employee who has resigned, been dismissed or removed from pension benefits. The employe

N. MANOHARAN, ETC.versusTHE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 14311 February 2026Dismissed

The case concerned whether the retired employees of the Heavy Water Plant (HWP) of the Department of Atomic Energy, Tuticorin, are covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employees had received gratuity under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and sought the higher amount prescribed under the Gratuity Act, leading

J.H. JADHAVversusM/S. FORBES GOKAK LTD.

2005 INSC 7511 February 2005Appeal(s) allowed

J.H. Jadhav, an employee of Forbes Gokak Ltd., was denied a promotion and raised an industrial dispute, claiming that the Gokak Mills Staff Union had espoused his cause. The Industrial Tribunal, after examining oral and documentary evidence, held that the dispute was industrial because the Union, though not a majority

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusLABOUR LAW PRACTITIONERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

1998 INSC 8111 February 1998Dismissed

The Labour Law Practitioners' Association challenged a Maharashtra Government notification appointing two Assistant Commissioners of Labour as judges of Labour Courts, alleging violation of Article 234 of the Constitution. The Bombay High Court set aside the notification, holding that Labour Courts are courts and their

C.V. SATHEESHCHANDRANversusGENERAL MANAGER, UCO BANK AND ORS .

2008 INSC 4111 January 2008Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a clerk promoted to Assistant Manager in UCO Bank, sought reversion to his clerical post after more than a year on probation. The bank granted reversion on conditions that he permanently lose any chance of promotion and be denied stagnation increments. The appellant challenged these conditions, arguing t

LAL MOHAMMAD AND ORS.versusINDIAN RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. & ORS.

2007 INSC 3011 January 2007Dismissed

The petitioners were workmen appointed on an ad‑hoc basis for the Anpara‑Rihand Nagar railway construction project of Indian Railway Construction Co. Ltd. (IRCON). After the project was completed in early 1998, they were served with retrenchment notices and offered compensation under Section 25‑F of the Industrial Disp

WORKMEN OF ENGLISH ELECTRIC COMPANY OF INDIA LTD., MADRASversusPRESIDING OFFICER & ANR.

1990 INSC 311 January 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by workmen challenging a Division Bench decision that dismissed their claim for confirmation and back wages under the Industrial Disputes Act. The workmen argued that 131 of the 186 casual employees had completed the requisite 240 days of service and were entitled to confirmation, whi

PRADEEP S/O RAJKUMAR JAINversusMANGANESE ORE (INDIA) LIMITED & ORS.

2021 INSC 86410 December 2021Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a qualified Chartered Accountant, was appointed Manager (Finance) and later Deputy Chief (Finance) at Manganese Ore (India) Ltd. He was suspended and subsequently dismissed following a series of show-cause notices after reporting late to work due to his father's death. The High Court reinstated him but d

STATE OF RAJASTHANversusGANESHI LAL

2007 INSC 125310 December 2007Case Partly allowed

Ganeshilal, a temporary peon in the Law Department of the Rajasthan State Government, was terminated and claimed the dismissal violated Section 25‑G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The State contended that the Law Department was not an "industry" within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act, and therefore the em

HARYANA LAND RECLAMATION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusNIRMAL KUMAR

2007 INSC 125110 December 2007Disposed off

The employer, Haryana Land Reclamation and Development Corporation Ltd., retrenched Nirmal Kumar, a watchman‑cum‑peon, in 1991. The workman filed a claim petition alleging illegal retrenchment, and the Labour Court held that the dismissal violated Rule 77 of the Rajasthan Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958, ordering reins

NATIONAL TEXTILE WORKERS' UNION ETC.versusP.R. RAMKRISHNAN AND OTHERS

1982 INSC 9410 December 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose when a group of shareholders filed a winding‑up petition against Ramakrishna Industries Ltd. and obtained an interim injunction that threatened the payment of wages and supplies to the company's employees. Three trade unions representing the workers applied to be impleaded as respondents, arguing that th

BHOGPUR CO-OP SUGAR MILLS LTD.versusHARMESH KUMAR

2006 INSC 81810 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Bhogpur Co‑op Sugar Mills Ltd, a seasonal sugar mill, hired Harmesh Kumar as a daily‑wage seasonal worker and later terminated his services at the end of the season. Kumar raised an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the State referred the matter to the Labour Court under Section 10(1)(c).

NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPN. LTD.versusV. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

2006 INSC 82310 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, V. Lakshminarayanan, joined National Small Industries Corp. Ltd. as a casual labourer in 1987 and was later appointed as an apprentice trainee (shop assistant) on 26 April 1990 for a two‑year training period. He was removed from service on 1 May 1992. The Labour Court held he was a workman under the Ind

GANGADHAR PILLAIversusM/S. SIEMENS LTD.

2006 INSC 83010 November 2006Dismissed

Gangadhar Pillai was engaged by Siemens Ltd. on a series of temporary contracts for project work from 1978 to 2000, each appointment ending when the specific project was completed. She claimed that the employer’s practice of repeatedly hiring her as a temporary worker for over two decades amounted to an unfair labour p

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS.versusSHIVAJI

2006 INSC 83510 November 2006Disposed off

The driver Shivaji was removed from service after a domestic inquiry that alleged he intentionally drove into a privately installed barrier, injuring a passenger. The Labour Court held the inquiry invalid but later found him guilty of serious misconduct and ordered termination. The High Court, finding no evidence of in

THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusD. J. BAHADUR & ORS.

1980 INSC 20910 November 1980Dismissed

The Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) and its workmen entered into two 1974 settlements under the Industrial Disputes Act (ID Act) that provided a cash bonus to Class III and IV employees. After the settlements expired, LIC issued notices under s.19(2) and s.9A of the ID Act and the Central Government amended Regulation

H.D. SINGHversusRESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 19510 September 1985Appeal(s) allowed

H.D. Singh was engaged as a daily‑wage "Tikka Mazdoor" by the Reserve Bank of India in 1974 and worked only sporadically. After passing his matriculation exam in 1975, a confidential RBI circular stipulated that such employees would be removed from the list of workers; consequently his name was struck off in July 1976

SUSHIL KUMAR SINGHALversusTHE REGIONAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

2010 INSC 49310 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a peon of Punjab National Bank, was convicted under Section 409 IPC for embezzling Rs 5,000 and was dismissed from service. While his criminal appeal upheld the conviction, the appellate court released him on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The bank dismissed him under Section 10(1)

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER TWAD BOARD & ANOTHERversusM. NATESAN ETC.

2019 INSC 67210 May 2019Disposed off

The respondents were engaged as temporary store watchmen on daily wages between 1986 and 1989 under a purely temporary engagement order that stipulated termination when the requirement ceased. After the stores were closed in 1990, the respondents were terminated and later obtained an award from the Labour Court directi

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusOM PAL

2007 INSC 40110 April 2007Case Partly allowed

Om Pal was engaged as a daily‑wage worker by the Haryana Urban Development Authority, first in Sub‑division No.2 for 145 days (Oct 1994‑Feb 1995) and then in Sub‑division No.3 for 90 days (Mar‑Jul 1995). After his services were terminated he raised an industrial dispute. The Industrial Tribunal‑cum‑Labour Court treated

GENERAL MANAGER, INDIAN OVERSEAS BANKversusWORKMEN, ALL INDIA OVERSEAS BANK EMPLOYEES UNION

2006 INSC 15310 March 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Indian Overseas Bank employed about 767 jewel appraisers on a commission basis and the bank's employees' union claimed they were part‑time workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Industrial Tribunal, relying on a prior Indian Bank decision, held them to be workmen, a view affirmed by the Madras High Co

MUKAND LTD.versusMUKAND STAFF AND OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

2004 INSC 15610 March 2004

Mukand Ltd. entered into several settlements with the Mukand Staff and Officers' Association, asserting that many of its employees were not "workmen" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. A dispute was referred to an Industrial Tribunal, which awarded wage increases and other benefits to both workmen and non‑workmen

PROCESS TECHNICIANS AND ANALYSTS' UNIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 24010 March 1997Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (Determination of Conditions of Service of Employees) Act, 1988 and the schemes framed under it in 1989 and 1996. The appellant union argued that Section 3 of the Act gave the Central Government unguided power, that the retr

M/S BENNET COLEMAN & CO. LTDversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS

2015 INSC 10310 February 2015Case Allowed

The case concerned a criminal prosecution of Bennet Coleman & Co. Ltd under Section 25U read with Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act for allegedly failing to implement the recommendations of the Manisana Wage Board constituted under the Working Journalists Act. The High Court had held the complaint maintainable;

HINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD. ETC.versusHINDUSTAN STEEL WORKS CONSTRUCTION LTD. EMPLOYEES UNION, HYDERABAD AND ANR. ETC.

1995 INSC 10910 February 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd., a wholly government‑owned construction company, completed a project at Hyderabad employing 230 workmen. After the project ended, 130 workers were transferred to its Visakhapatnam unit while 100 were retrenched. The Industrial Tribunal held that the Hyderabad unit was part of a s

NANDKISHORE SHRAVAN AHIRRAOversusKOSAN INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.

2020 INSC 2710 January 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Nandkishore Shravan Ahirrao, a workman employed in the assembly department of Kosan Industries, was dismissed for causing a work disruption. The Labour Court, on reference under the Industrial Disputes Act, held the dismissal harsh and ordered his reinstatement with 25% back wages for the surplus period. The Gujarat Hi

DURGAPUR CASUAL WORKERS UNION & ORS.versusFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 8489 December 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) closed its rice mill and thereafter employed 49 former contract workers as casual daily‑wage employees. The workers sought regularisation, alleging that their continued casualisation constituted an unfair labour practice under item 10 of the Fifth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes

P. VIRUDHACHALAM AND ORS.versusTHE MANAGEMENT OF LOTUS MILLS AND ANR.

1997 INSC 7969 December 1997Dismissed

The appellants, workmen of Lotus Mill, claimed full lay‑off compensation under Section 25C of the Industrial Disputes Act, arguing that a settlement reached during conciliation on 5 May 1980 – which limited compensation to 67% of the statutory amount and was signed by only four of five unions – could not bind them beca

MANAGEMENT OF BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.versusM. MANI

2017 INSC 10889 November 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) dismissed two drivers, M. Mani and the late T.A. Mathivanan, after a departmental enquiry found them guilty of theft of a heavy machine while on duty. The employees were later acquitted of the theft charge in a criminal trial under IPC s.379. They challenged their dismissals in a La

DIRECTOR, FISHERIES TERMINAL DIVISIONversusBHIKUBHAI MEGHAJIBHAI CHAVDA

2009 INSC 12249 November 2009Dismissed

The respondent, a daily‑wage watchman employed by the Director, Fisheries Terminal Division, was terminated without notice. He claimed reinstatement and back wages before the Labour Court, which ordered reinstatement with 20% back wages; the High Court affirmed. The employer appealed, contending that the fisheries depa

CRESCENT IRON AND STEEL CORPORATION LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

1992 INSC 2729 October 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Crescent Iron and Steel Corporation Ltd., a private foundry, locked out its operations in July 1985 and referred the matter to the BIFR under Section 15(1) of the Sick Industrial Company (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. While the reference was pending, it sought closure permission under Section 25 of the Industrial Disp

THE GENERAL MANAGER (P) CANARA BANKversusGANGANARASIMHAIAH

2025 INSC 10889 September 2025Disposed off

The respondent, a sub‑staff of Canara Bank, was found guilty of making unauthorized entries, coercing the branch manager to sanction loans for his family, and tampering with bank records, leading to his compulsory retirement in 2006. The disciplinary authority’s findings were affirmed by the appellate authority, and th

ALLAHABAD BANKversusSHRI PREM SINGH

1996 INSC 10099 September 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Allahabad Bank appointed Shri Prem Singh as a temporary cashier for one day at a time through successive letters, each stating that his service would automatically terminate at the end of the day. After four days of such employment (14-17 June 1977), the bank did not offer further work. The respondent filed an industri

TATA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL WORKERS UNIONversusTATA MEMORIAL CENTRE AND ANOTHER

2010 INSC 4879 August 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The Tata Memorial Hospital Workers Union, a trade union registered under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, sought to maintain its recognition against a rival workers' association. The rival argued that the Tata Memorial Centre (TMC) was under the Central Go

NIRMAL SINGHversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1984 INSC 1359 August 1984Appeal(s) allowed

Nirmal Singh, a Branch Manager of a cooperative bank, was dismissed after an inquiry into a fraudulent draft encashment. He challenged his dismissal, and the Government of Punjab referred his grievance to the Conciliation Officer, who recommended that the dispute be referred to a Labour Court. The Punjab Labour Commiss

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.versusPWD EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS. ETC

2013 INSC 4509 July 2013Disposed off

The Gujarat government, after representations by labour unions, issued a resolution on 17 October 1988 to regularise daily‑wage and semi‑skilled workers across all departments, providing graded benefits based on years of service under Section 258 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The applicability of this scheme to daily

HARMOHINDER SINGHversusKHARGA CANTEEN, AMBALA CANTT.

2001 INSC 2839 July 2001Dismissed

Harmohinder Singh was appointed as a temporary employee of Kharga Canteen in 1974 under standing orders that allowed termination on one month's notice. In 1988 the canteen amended its standing orders to impose a maximum service period of 15 years and an age limit of 60, and terminated Singh's employment in June 1989 af

SURENDRA KUMAR SHARMAversusVIKAS ADHIKARI AND ANR.

2003 INSC 2929 May 2003Dismissed

The appellant was engaged as a daily‑wage worker under the Jawahar Rozgar Yojna, a temporary employment scheme, initially for 100 days and subsequently extended, completing a total of 240 days. The post he occupied was later abolished due to lack of funds, and his services were terminated. He filed a writ petition clai

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHERversusSATYA PRAKASH

2013 INSC 2309 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a daily‑wage bus conductor employed by Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation for only a few months, was dismissed after a departmental inquiry found he had collected fare without issuing tickets. He filed a civil suit, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and subsequently lodged a complain

BANK OF. INDIAversusSECRETARY, BANK OF INDIA STAFF UNION AND ANR .

2001 INSC 1959 April 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Workmen employed by Bank of India at various collection centres and clearing houses claimed entitlement to a special assistant allowance under the Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Tribunal held that the workmen were entitled to the allowance for the days they worked at the centres and ordered payment. The Bank a

R.C. TIWARIversusM.P. STATE CO-OPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. AND ORS.

1997 INSC 3989 April 1997Dismissed

R.C. Tiwari, an employee of M.P. State Co‑operative Marketing Federation Ltd., was dismissed for misconduct. He obtained a reference under the Madhya Pradesh Societies Act, which confirmed the dismissal and became final. He then approached the Labour Court under Section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which set a

DR. H. MUKHERJEEversusS.K. BHARGAWA

1996 INSC 4989 April 1996Dismissed

Dr. H. Mukherjee, a Central Government employee, filed a civil suit seeking Rs. 2 lakh in damages against his superior, S.K. Bhargava, alleging that the latter deliberately issued vindictive orders and tampered with official records to harass him and block his appointment as Chief Controller. The defendant contended th

BHARAT BARREL & DRUM MANUFACTURING COMPANY PVT. LIMITEDversusBHARAT BARREL EMPLOYEES UNION

1987 INSC 999 April 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The Bharat Barrel Company gave a closure notice effective 1 November 1971, but terminated the services of its workmen on 30 October 1971 under a standing order amid violent unrest. The first Industrial Tribunal (IT No. 325 of 1971) held that the workers were validly discharged before the closure and therefore were not

SANT RAJ & ANR.versusO.P. SINGLA & ANR.

1985 INSC 819 April 1985Case Partly allowed

Two loaders, Sant Raj and Itwari Lal Sherya, were terminated by their employer, a foreign air‑transport company. The Labour Court held the termination to be retrenchment and illegal because the employer had not complied with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and awarded them one year's wages as compensa

U.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusU.P. RAJYA SADAK PARIYAHAN KARAMCHARI UNION

2007 INSC 2729 March 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Uttar Pradesh Rajya Sadak Pariyahan Karamchari Union filed an application before the Labour Court under Section 11‑C of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, read with Section 13‑A of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, seeking a declaration that fifteen contract drivers and conductors be regularised as su

PUNJAB STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ANR.versusSUDESH KUMAR PURI

2007 INSC 1239 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) engaged several individuals as private meter readers on a contract basis, paying them a fixed rate of Re.1 per meter reading. After the contract periods expired and regular meter readers were appointed, the engagements were terminated. The respondents claimed they were workmen

MANAGEMENT OF M/S M.S. NALLY BHARAT ENGG. CO. LTD.versusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

1990 INSC 319 February 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Management of M.S. Nally Bharat Engineering Co. Ltd., challenged a notification by the Bihar Government that transferred a pending dismissal reference of a workman (respondent No.4) from the Labour Court, Dhanbad to the Labour Court, Patna under Section 33‑B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The tran

ADMINISTRATOR KAMALA NEHRU MEMORIAL HOSPITALversusVINOD KUMAR

2005 INSC 5998 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Administrator of Kamala Nehru Memorial Hospital terminated the services of clerk Vinod Kumar, who claimed that he had worked continuously for at least 240 days in a calendar year and was therefore entitled to protection under Section 6(N) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court held that he h

U.P. STATE BRASSWARE CORPN. LTD. AND ANR.versusUDAI NARAIN PANDEY

2005 INSC 6028 December 2005Case Partly allowed

The workman Udai Narain Pandey was engaged on a daily‑wage basis for a fixed tenure by U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. His services were terminated on the expiry of that tenure, but he had rendered more than 240 days of service in the preceding year, making him a "workman" under Section 6‑N of the U.P. Industrial

THE PAPNASAM LABOUR UNIONversusMADURA COATS LTD. AND ANR.

1994 INSC 5858 December 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The Madura Coats Ltd. sought a declaration that Section 25‑M of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (as amended in 1976), which requires prior governmental permission before a lay‑off, violated Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The Madras High Court held the provision ultra vires, relying on the reasoning in Excel We

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

1994 INSC 5868 December 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, senior officials of Rohtas Industries Ltd, were prosecuted for laying off workers without prior permission under Section 25-M of the Industrial Disputes Act after the Bihar State Electricity Board disconnected power due to unpaid dues. The High Court held the prosecution maintainable but ordered an enqu

M/S. TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY LIMITEDversusN.K. SINGH

2006 INSC 8098 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, N.K. Singh, an Assistant Store Keeper, was found to have occupied company quarters without permission and assaulted the Town Warden during the execution of an eviction decree, leading to an FIR under IPC sections 311, 307 and 34. A domestic inquiry under the company's standing orders concluded that Sing

MILKHI RAMversusHIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

2021 INSC 6388 October 2021Dismissed

The appellant, a daily‑wage employee of Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board, challenged his termination by filing a civil suit invoking Sections 25B and 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking reinstatement, regularisation and back wages. The civil court entertained the suit, held that the appellant had

BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ANR.versusRAM DEO PRASAD SINGH & ORS.

2011 INSC 6638 September 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents, former security guards of the Patratu Thermal Power Station, were dismissed in 1975 and filed a civil suit in Patna in 1979 seeking reinstatement, which the trial court allowed. The Bihar State Electricity Board appealed, and the appeal was heard by the Additional District Judge, Patna, and later by th

ANAND REGIONAL CO-OP. OIL SEEDSGROWERS UNION LTDversusSHAILESHKUMAR HARSHADBHAI SHAH

2006 INSC 4988 August 2006Case Partly allowed

The appellant, Anand Regional Co‑op Oil Seeds Growers Union Ltd., dismissed Shailesh Kumar Harshadbhai Shah, an Assistant Executive in its Quality Control Department, for alleged misconduct. Shah challenged the dismissal, contending that he was not a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, an

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, SAMRALAversusSUKHWINDER KAUR

2006 INSC 4998 August 2006Disposed off

The Municipal Council of Samrala appointed Sukhwinder Kaur as a clerk on a contractual, temporary basis, expressly stating that the Executive Officer could dismiss her without notice. She was appointed and terminated three times within eighteen months. The Labour Court held that her dismissal violated Section 25F of th

BINNY LTD. AND ANR.versusV. SADASIVAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 3438 August 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a private employer could be subjected to a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution for terminating employees under a contractual clause. The Court held that mandamus is a public‑law remedy and is available only when the body performs a public function or the duty has a

UMESH KORGA BHANDARIversusMAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD. AND ANR.

2005 INSC 3448 August 2005Matter referred to larger bench

Employees of the departmental canteen of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. were terminated and challenged the termination before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT), which reinstated them. The Bombay High Court division bench held that, because the canteen posts were civil posts under a 1979 notification, th

NANDKISHORE LALBHAI MEHTAversusNEW ERA FABRICS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 4908 July 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Nandkishore Lalbhai Mehta, entered into a sale agreement with the respondents for a plot in Mahim, subject to obtaining consent from the Mill Mazdoor Sabha (labour union) and various statutory permissions. The union refused consent, and the respondents declared the agreement cancelled and offered to retu

M/S. HARYANA STATE F.C.C.W. STORE LTD. AND ANR.versusRAM NIWAS AND ANR.

2002 INSC 2858 July 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana State F.C.C.W. Store Ltd. engaged two individuals as watchmen/chowkidars on a daily-wage contract for a specific purpose—watching grain stock stored in an open area—and for a defined period of three months or until the stock was cleared. After the stock was disposed of, the respondents were terminated on 26

M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 7058 July 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the Delhi Master Plan (2001) under the Delhi Development Act, 1957, which categorises hazardous, noxious, heavy and large industries (H‑a and H‑b) as prohibited in Delhi and mandates their relocation within three years. The Court found that 168 such industries continued to operate illegally,

THE CHIEF SOIL CONSERVATOR PUNJAB AND ORS.versusGURMAIL SINGH

2009 INSC 7778 May 2009Disposed off

The workman Gurmail Singh was employed intermittently as a bulldozer operator on 89‑day contracts from November 1990 until his termination on 15 July 1996. He claimed that his dismissal without notice, enquiry or compensation amounted to retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and sought reinstatement with

REGIONAL AUTHORITY, DENA BANK AND ANR.versusGHANSHYAM

2001 INSC 2678 May 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a former personal driver of Dena Bank's regional manager, claimed to be a workman and obtained a Labour Court award for reinstatement with back wages. Dena Bank challenged the award in the Allahabad High Court, which stayed the award on the condition that the bank reinstate the respondent and pay him re

FAKIRBHAI FULABHAI SOLANKIversusPRESIDING OFFICER & ANR.

1986 INSC 1128 May 1986Appeal(s) allowed

Fakirbhai Fulabhai Solanki, a protected workman, was found guilty of misconduct and suspended without pay pending the employer's application under Section 33(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for permission to dismiss him. No subsistence allowance was paid during the six‑year pendency of the application, and the

K.G. SESHADRIversusTHE TRUSTEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 3338 April 2026Dismissed

K.G. Seshadri, a clerk appointed by State Bank of India in 1978 and confirmed in 1979, left the country in 1989, returned in 2004 and sought re‑employment, which the bank refused and instead declared his services voluntarily abandoned in 2008. He filed writ petitions and a claim before the Labour Court for pension bene

PHYSICAL RESEARCH LABORATORYversusK.G. SHARMA

1997 INSC 3908 April 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The Physical Research Laboratory (PRL), a government research institute under the Department of Space, retired employee K.G. Sharma at age 58, prompting him to claim a statutory retirement age of 60 under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court held that PRL was an "industry" within the meaning of Section 2

THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusM/S TEXMO INDUSTRIES

2021 INSC 1678 March 2021Dismissed

The Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) inspected Texmo Industries and found that the company had underpaid ESI contributions by including conveyance allowance in the wage base. Texmo contested, arguing that conveyance allowance is not "wages" under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. Th

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCILversusPAN SINGH AND ORS.

2007 INSC 2608 March 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) had 17 senior Shift‑In‑Charge employees who voluntarily became Meter Readers and were given a higher pay scale as an ad‑hoc, personal measure. An industrial dispute was later raised by other Meter Readers, and the Industrial Tribunal awarded pay parity to those Meter Readers who w

M/S.WHIRLPOOL OF INDIA LTD.versusEMPLOYEES' STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

2000 INSC 1278 March 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Whirlpool of India Ltd., paid its workers a quarterly production incentive under a scheme in addition to normal wages. The Employees' State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) treated these incentives as "wages" under Section 2(22) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 and demanded contribution to the ESI

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusFEMALE WORKERS (MUSTER ROLL) AND ANR.

2000 INSC 1298 March 2000Dismissed

Female workers employed on a daily‑wage muster roll by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi were denied maternity benefits that regular female employees received. The Industrial Tribunal held that these workers were entitled to the benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 and directed the corporation to extend them

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