Supreme Court of India Judgements

46820 Judgements hosted as on 28/07/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Labour Cases

Labour Cases

Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of the Department of Telecommunications, 1989 – Clause 5(i) – Casual workers – Temporary Status and Regularization – Respondent has completed maximum 38 days in 12 calendar months during 1.1.1995 to 31.12.1995 and as such the applicant is not entitled to grant of temporary status as per the provisions of the Scheme

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SRI DEO KUMAR RAI @ DEO KUMAR RAY — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and…

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 25F – Termination – Claim benefit under Section 25F- Nature of service rendered by the appellants as daily wager for a short period, while upholding the termination of the appellants being in violation of Section 25F of the Act 1947 – It just and reasonable to award a lumpsum monetary compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- to each of the appellants-workmen in full and final satisfaction of the dispute in lieu of right to claim reinstatement with 50% back wages as awarded by the Tribunal.

Oct 31, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K.V. ANIL MITHRA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay…

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 9A – Transferring the respective workman from Dewas to Chopanki, which is at about 900 Kms. away is in violation of Section 9A read with Fourth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act and is arbitrary, mala fide and victimization – By such transfer, their status as “workman” would be changed to that of “supervisor” – By such a change after their transfer to Chopanki and after they work as supervisor they will be deprived of the beneficial provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and, therefore, the nature of service conditions/service would be changed.

Oct 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CAPARO ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED — Appellant Vs. UMMED SINGH LODHI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Sections 25L and 25N – Termination – Held, Irrigation Department of state will not be an Industrial Establishment within the meaning of Section 25L – Labour Court as well the learned Single Judge and the learned Division Bench of the High Court have not adverted to the question whether the Irrigation Department of the state is an Industrial Establishment within the meaning of Section 25L – There is no finding recorded that the Irrigation Department of the state is doing manufacturing activity as provided in sub-clause (k) of Section 2 of the Factories Act – Termination of the employment of the respondent was legal and valid – Appeal allowed.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SOMDUTT SHARMA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 11­A – Dismissal – Allegation of drunkenness – Its jurisdiction under Section 11­A of the Act 1947 although is a wide one but it must be judiciously exercised – Judicial discretion, it is trite, cannot be exercised either whimsically or capriciously. It may scrutinize or analyse the evidence but what is important is how it does so – Award passed by the Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court under impugned judgment is not sustainable in law – Appeal allowed.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK — Appellant Vs. R.C. SRIVASTAVA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(s).…

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 25F – Direction for reinstatement HELD when it comes to the case of termination of a daily-wage worker and where the termination is found illegal because of a procedural defect, namely, in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, this Court is consistent in taking the view that in such cases reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and instead the workman should be given monetary compensation which will meet the ends of justice. Rationale for shifting in this direction is obvious.

Sep 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM MANOHAR LOHIA JOINT HOSPITAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MUNNA PRASAD SAINI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and…

Labour Cases

HELD no factory/classes of factories could be exempted from compliance of the Factories Act, unless an ‘internal disturbance’ causes a grave emergency that threatens the security of the state, so as to constitute a ‘public emergency’ Pandemic is not emergency. Gujarat notification quashed.

Oct 1, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH  GUJARAT MAZDOOR SABHA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra…

Labour Cases

SC Gives Option To Establishments And Workers To Negotiate On Full Payment Of Wages, Regardless Of MHA Order HELD “No industry can survive without the workers. Thus employers and employee need to negotiate and settle among themselves. If they are not able to settle it among themselves, they need to approach the concerned labour authorities to sort the issues out”

Jun 13, 2020 sclaw

SC Gives Option To Establishments And Workers To Negotiate On Full Payment Of Wages, Regardless Of MHA Order [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 12 Jun 2020 10:58 AM The Supreme…

Labour Cases

[Employee’s Compensation Act] Relevant Date For The Determination Of Compensation Payable Is The Date Of The Accident: SC HELD ….benefit of 2009 amendment of the Act which had deleted the provision that capped the monthly wages of an employee at Rs 4,000 does not apply to accidents that took place prior to its coming into force……. Award not interfered.

Feb 13, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. SIVARAMAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. P. SATHISHKUMAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi, JJ.…

You missed

Education

Education Law — Admissions — Eligibility Criteria — Prospectus issued by University — Amendments and Addendums — Appellant admitted to postgraduate program based on provisional admission — Completed course and received degree — University withdrew degree based on initial ineligibility — Court held that due to confusion and uncertainty caused by frequent changes in eligibility criteria, the benefit should go to the appellant, especially since she had completed the course with good marks.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Matrimonial

Transfer Petition — Jurisdiction — Courts — Petition seeking transfer of matrimonial and criminal cases from one state to another filed by both parties, wife seeking transfer of divorce case from Delhi to UP, husband seeking transfer of criminal cases from UP to Delhi. Parties have also filed special leave petitions against High Court orders. Supreme Court has the power to transfer cases.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 34, 120B — Murder — Appeal against conviction and sentence for murder — Key eyewitness evidence of the deceased’s son and wife — Distance allegedly covered on bicycle within thirty minutes questioned — Improbability of covering 16 kilometers in that timeframe raised substantial doubt about their presence at the crime scene — Absence of corroboration from other witnesses, who turned hostile and suggested multiple assailants, further weakens the prosecution’s case — Post-mortem report indicating numerous injuries, consistent with multiple attackers — Deceased’s history as a habitual drunkard and criminal suggests potential enmity with various individuals — Conviction based solely on questionable eyewitness testimony not sustainable when reasonable doubt exists about accused’s presence and involvement — Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence set aside

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw
Service

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 13(2) and Rule 14, Appendix 3 — Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties — Initiation of by authority competent to impose minor penalties — Permissible — Rule 13(2) allows a disciplinary authority competent to impose minor penalties to institute proceedings for major penalties, even if not competent to impose major penalties itself. – Charge Sheet — Validity of issuance by General Manager (Telecommunications) for major penalties — Held valid as the General Manager is competent to impose minor penalties and Rule 13(2) permits initiation of proceedings for major penalties by such an authority.

Jul 29, 2025 sclaw