To Claim Employment In Any Organization, Direct Master-Servant Relationship Must Be Established On Paper

The Supreme Court recently observed that for a person to claim employment in an organization, a direct master-servant relationship must be established on paper.

“For a person to claim employment under any organization, a direct master-servant relationship has to be established on paper. In the present case(s), admittedly, the only document, which the private respondents have in their favour, is showing that they were posted at various places doing different nature of work. This clearly in the considered opinion of the Court would not establish master-servant relationship”,

A bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra rejected the workman's argument that that the supervisory control of appellant on the workman establishes a master-servant relationship.

“Whatever material has been placed and even the best point which was argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the private respondents before this Court was that since there was supervisory and jurisdictional control over the private respondents by the appellants, ipso facto, they would become employees of the appellants is noted only to be rejected.”

The Supreme Court rejected this argument, holding that a master-servant relationship must be substantiated through clear documentation.

The Supreme Court stated that if there had been any substantial evidence supporting the respondents' claim of being employees of the appellants, it would have refrained from interfering with the High Court's orders and allowed the Labour Court to reconsider the matter.

However, since the respondents primary defence was rejected, the Court concluded that a remand to the Labour Court would be pointless. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeals, and set aside the High Court's orders for remanding the case to the Labour Court, noting that no further orders required since the awards had already been quashed.

Case No: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL)NO. 19648 OF 2023

'Shocking' : Supreme Court Slams J&K Admin For 16 Years' Refusal To Comply With HC Order On Regularisation Of Daily Wager

The Supreme Court of India made a scathing observation regarding the 16-year long delay by the UT of J&K in complying with the High Court's order, which directed the government to consider the case of the respondent daily wagers for regularization as per specific Government Order SRO 64 of 1994.

IN 2007, J&K High Court had passed the directions to appellants to consider the case of the respondent at par with other daily wage workers, who had received the benefits of regularization under SRO 64 of 1994 back in 2006.

A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh observed that, “What concerns us is not the delay of decades alone, but also the incontrovertible fact that the poor respondents, being daily wage workers, have been repeatedly harassed by the petitioners by passing cryptic orders, thereby overlooking the true import and spirit of the order of the learned Single Judge.”

The court further stated, “We consider the instant case fit for imposing exemplary costs on the delinquent officers, besides also recommending strong disciplinary actions against them.”

Equal pay for equal work--Application of the principle of equal pay for equal work cannot be claimed merely because there was delegation of certain power--Claim of the Respondent for a higher pay scale is on the ground that he was discharging the duties of a higher post, without, giving any factual details--Claim untenable

sclaw.in

Accident—During course of employment—Deceased a bus driver-­Accident took place when the deceased was coming down from the roof of the bus after having his meals—Death held to be arise out of and was in course of employment.

sclaw.in

Interest Law--Interest-- Starting Point--Question arises as to from which date interest would be paid--Starting point is on completion of one month from the date on which claim fell due--It cannot be the date of accident--It has to be taken to be the date of adjudication of the claim-- Workman's Compensation Act, 1923, Sections 3, 4A(3)(a).

sclaw.in

Service Law—Re-employment—Regularization of any employee already in service does not give any right to retrenched employee for claiming re-employment in the services

sclaw.in

Service Law—Continuous Service—Once it is established that the employee had voluntarily abandoned his service, he could not have been in "continuous service" as defined under S.2(oo) of the Act-Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, S.2(oo).

sclaw.in

Service Law-Exparte Award—Industrial Courts has the jurisdiction to entertain an application for setting aside an award made after thirty days of its publication

sclaw.in

Service Law--Wages--Any isolated one time ex-gratia payment made by way of an interim relief cannot be regarded as wages or its component—If such amount had been paid regularly by the employer to the employee in compliance with his terms of employment, it would have been regarded as wages or its component—Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,

sclaw.in

Backwages--Backwages are ordinarily to be granted, keeping in view the principles of grant of damages in mind--It cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Transfer of Employee--Ordinarily an employee who has been transferred should, subject to just exceptions, join at his transferred place--Ordinarily in an industrial undertaking indiscipline should not be encouraged.

sclaw.in

Workmen Compensation—Interest on Compensation—Relevant date for determination of the rate of compensation is the date of accident and not the date of adjudication of the claim by the Commissioner

sclaw.in