Intellectual Property Rights: Practice and Drafting by Adv Gautam Matani. Register Now!
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     03 January 2010

Latest Rulings of Supreme Court on Unfair labour Pracice

2009 SCCL.COM 3185(Case No: Civil Appeal No. 7993 of 2009 With Civil Appeal Nos. 7994 to 8018 of 2009 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 12534/08,19022/08, 17741/08, 17749/08, 17987/08, 17989/08, 17992/08, 18000/08, 18032/08, 18033/08, 18036/08, 18037/08, 18047/08, 18052/08, 18054/08, 18058/08, 18063/08, 18068/08, 18070/08, 18075/08, 18080/08, 18082/08, 18083/08, 18090/08 and 18092/08))
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Appellant versus Avinash Dhaniramji Kamble Respondent
Date of Decision(mm/dd/yy): 12/3/2009.
Judge(s): Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee, Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha and Hon'ble Dr. Justice B.S. Chauhan.
Subject Index: Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 — declaration of unfair labour practices on the part of the employer — Industrial Court not granted relief to the present respondents as regards to unfair labour practice as they have not completed 240 days of continuous service as required under the Model Standing Orders — both Single Judge and the Division Bench treated the gaps between diverse spells of employment as part of continuous service on the ground that these were due to involuntary unemployment — not the case set up by the complainants — none of the complainants/respondents challenged their termination and fresh employment in respect of some temporaries as were engaged under the contract of service — fair and reasonable proposal of the employer regarding amicable settlement not accepted — impugned judgement of the High Court set aside — remitted back to the High Court for fresh hearing and disposal in accordance with law — no costs.


 2 Replies

PBS KUMAR (HR - PROFESSIONAL)     07 January 2010

Dear Raj Kumar ji,

Thanks for very informative posting.




jagadish paranjape (Advocate)     30 January 2010

very interesting judgement.However the burden of proving 240 days service is on  employee,and in such cases employees fail due to poor documentation. 

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register