NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LID. versus HANUMAN

NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LID. versus HANUMAN

The respondent failed to establish by evidence that his absence was due to continued illness. The finding of the Labour Court was perverse. Service terminated automatically under the standing order due to absence beyond eight days; S. 33 was not contravened, rendering S. 33A application not maintainable.

Parties
Appellant: National Engineering Industries Ltd.; Respondent: Hanuman
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 July 1967
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Under Article 136
Outcome
Appeal allowed, Labour Court's order reinstating Hanuman set aside.
Legal Topics
Automatic Termination of Service, Standing Orders, S. 33 and S. 33 a Industrial Disputes Act, Findings of Fact Under Article 136, Natural Justice

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

National Engineering Industries Ltd.

Appellant

Hanuman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Under Article 136

  1. 1 Whether the respondent's absence was due to illness and whether certificate was sent.
  2. 2 Whether automatic termination under Standing Orders bars application under S. 33A.
  3. 3 Whether S. 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act is contravened when termination is automatic.

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent failed to establish by evidence that his absence was due to continued illness. The finding of the Labour Court was perverse. Service terminated automatically under the standing order due to absence beyond eight days; S. 33 was not contravened, rendering S. 33A application not maintainable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, Labour Court's order reinstating Hanuman set aside.

Orders

  • Automatic termination of Hanuman's service under the relevant standing order stands.
  • Appellant to pay costs of respondent.