skg
25 November 2009 at 13:30
Dear Legal Experts,
A workman was terminated on grounds of surplusage/reorganisation and global recession.He challanges this termination in labour court.
The employer in his statement to the court also admitted that his termination was not due to any misconduct.
Knowing that the court cases takes 6 to 8 years to decide the workman keep on trying for other jobs but whenever he got some positive response from some other employer his inability to produce experience/character and releiving certificate become a major problem
in getting a new job.
My question is since the employer has himself declared that the termination was not due to any misconduct can the workman ask for these certificates from his employer or he has to pray the court to direct the employer to release these certificates to him so that he does
not face any problem while he is trying to get new job in order to feed his family.
Whether doing so his case will become weak?
rgds
skg
Anonymous
25 November 2009 at 09:53
It is well known that the transfers of employees cna be questions if we prove malafide intention or non application of mind by the competant authority. how to establish the malafide nature as it is a mental state. The competant authority has given oppertunity for the employees who compleated five years of service at one place for submting options and the employees who compleated one year also has rewuested for a transfer. The authority in the disguise to settle the imbalnces transfered the employees who were not given oppertunity to submit options.The requirement of staff at every districtwas tkaen from the officer working under his control a single officer but not a committee. after issung transfer orders stating as administrative exigencies he has altered the places in respect of some of the employees in which a person having 11 years balance of service was posted in a near by place of 30 kms and another aged 57 to a place of 180 kms. can this be treated as malafide intention. pl. suggest any leading cases if available deceided by the supreme court.
Deepti
24 November 2009 at 12:21
Is there any law/act which clearly states that unutilised priviledge laeve has to be encashed at the time of resignation.
If yes, please give me the section pertaining to this clause of the law/act.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 19:23
Dear Sir,
In a Private Sector Bank, [allegedly a subsidiary of Public Sector Bank, holding 98% shareholding in this bank], which is a Banking Company within the meanings of The Companies Act 1956 & The Banking Regulation Act 1949, has following provisions in Service condition about Priviledge leave/ Earned Leave:
1. Priviledge leave upto 240 days can be accumulated by an employee during service period, which is encashed on the date of superannuation/ retirement. No other specic provision say in case of resignation is provided i.e. neither barred nor allowed.
2. At the time of resignation the earned / priviledged leave are not allowed to be encashed. However in Parent bank 1/2 of accumulated leave are permitted to be encashed.
My query:
a)whether earned leave/ priviledge leave [which is a right under the law] of an employee can be denied by employer on resignation and whether employer has any right not to allow encashment when earlier employer has denied the same to employee on official exigencies.
b) What provision of Law governs the rules relating to privilege leave. Please note that Partial provisions of The Shop & establishment Act are applicable upon the Bank.
c)Service conditions interalia provides that at the time of resignation three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is provided which may be termed as liquidated damages and when appointment contract provides for specific liquidated damages, whether employer is entitled to add more damages by way of forfieting priviledge /earned leave.
An early clarification is solicited.
Thanks & regards.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 19:21
Dear Sir,
In a Private Sector Bank, [allegedly a subsidiary of Public Sector Bank, holding 98% shareholding in this bank], which is a Banking Company within the meanings of The Companies Act 1956 & The Banking Regulation Act 1949, has following provisions in Service condition about Priviledge leave/ Earned Leave:
1. Priviledge leave upto 240 days can be accumulated by an employee during service period, which is encashed on the date of superannuation/ retirement. No other specic provision say in case of resignation is provided i.e. neither barred nor allowed.
2. At the time of resignation the earned / priviledged leave are not allowed to be encashed. However in Parent bank 1/2 of accumulated leave are permitted to be encashed.
My query:
a)whether earned leave/ priviledge leave [which is a right under the law] of an employee can be denied by employer on resignation and whether employer has any right not to allow encashment when earlier employer has denied the same to employee on official exigencies.
b) What provision of Law governs the rules relating to privilege leave. Please note that Partial provisions of The Shop & establishment Act are applicable upon the Bank.
c)Service conditions interalia provides that at the time of resignation three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is provided which may be termed as liquidated damages and when appointment contract provides for specific liquidated damages, whether employer is entitled to add more damages by way of forfieting priviledge /earned leave.
An early clarification is solicited.
Thanks & regards.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 18:38
Dear Sir,
I am working with a Private sector Bank. As per service regulations applicable, the privilege leave are permitted to be accumulated upto 240 days. These leave are permitted to be encashed at the time of superannuation/ retirement. However, if an employee resigns the Bank do not encash the same. There is no specific provision in this regard about the refusal of encashment. The Service conditions further stipulates that at the time of resigantion three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is permitted- That is to say that liquidated damages on resignation is three months notice or payment in lieu thereof specifically provided. Thus refusal of priviledge leave is arbitary.
The Banks are also governed by partial provisions of Shop & Establishment Act.
My query is whether priviledge leave earned during course of employment can be forfieted by employer when liquidated damages are already provided for resignation. Secondly, which Act governs the leave rules in case of Private sector Bank, which is basically a Banking Company within the meanings of the Companies Act 1956 & The banking Regulation Act 1949.
An early reply is solicited.
Thanks & Regard.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 18:37
Dear Sir,
I am working with a Private sector Bank. As per service regulations applicable, the privilege leave are permitted to be accumulated upto 240 days. These leave are permitted to be encashed at the time of superannuation/ retirement. However, if an employee resigns the Bank do not encash the same. There is no specific provision in this regard about the refusal of encashment. The Service conditions further stipulates that at the time of resigantion three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is permitted- That is to say that liquidated damages on resignation is three months notice or payment in lieu thereof specifically provided. Thus refusal of priviledge leave is arbitary.
The Banks are also governed by partial provisions of Shop & Establishment Act.
My query is whether priviledge leave earned during course of employment can be forfieted by employer when liquidated damages are already provided for resignation. Secondly, which Act governs the leave rules in case of Private sector Bank, which is basically a Banking Company within the meanings of the Companies Act 1956 & The banking Regulation Act 1949.
An early reply is solicited.
Thanks & Regard.
Asha Pole
23 November 2009 at 10:54
Incase of private company,if the appointment letter given to an employee does not state the clause of bonus and gratuity, would the employer still be liable to pay and suppose if the employer refutes to make such payment in the absence of such clause.Will the company face any dire consequences from the legal aspect.
Suresh C Mishra
22 November 2009 at 22:34
In my case on PI of fairness of Enq. The workman appeared first and lead evidence but the employer says that Enq. Officer is not available for witness on PI , what will be effect if EO will not present ? whether employer can lead secondary evidence on PI > Please rePly with judgement on this issue
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Factory act related query
wat r the consequences of non renewal of factory licence and penal provision for the same