Employer’s Failure to Allot Work to Employees is Deemed Retrenchment: JKL HC
Employer’s Failure to Allot Work to Employee is Deemed Retrenchment: JKL HC
JK Handicrafts accused Syed Mustofa of "abandoning" his job a while back, but the court determined that the employee couldn't work because his employer's failure hadn't given him work or ordered a posting, not because Mustafo wanted to resign.
Employer’s Failure to Allot Work to Employee is Deemed Retrenchment, held by JKL High Court.
On August 10th, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held a landmark judgement in favor of an employee, Aga Syed Mustafa, in a termination dispute with the renowned company JK Handicrafts.
Justice Sanjay Dhar’s judgement in the case of MANAGING DIRECTOR JK HANDICRAFTS Vs AGA SYED MUSTAFA & ANR case No.: OWP No.1319/2016 shows the complexities of the case and the legal interpretation surrounding the termination of services.
JK Handicrafts accused Aga Syed Mustafa of “resigning” from his position as an assistant craftsman at the company for almost four decades.
Unlike his coworkers, he was not allocated any post, function, or employment after being transferred to the company’s headquarters. The establishment fired him and claimed that Mustafa had abandoned his position, while the latter maintained that he had been awaiting further orders for posting all along.
The case was escalated to the assistant labor commissioner, who stated that Mustafa’s dismissal did not conform with the applicable parts of the Industrial Disputes Act. Following that, the case was referred to the industrial tribunal for determination.
Initially, the tribunal sided with JK Handicrafts, but this result was overturned by a previous High Court judgement. The case was then remanded to the tribunal for further consideration.
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh ruled in this case that Mustafa had not voluntarily abandoned his employment; rather, he was unable to work since the company did not assign him work or offer him a posting like his fellow coworkers.
As a result, his dismissal was essentially a “retrenchment.” The court defined’retrenchment’ as any cessation of service, regardless of reason, excluding voluntary retirement or superannuation.
Mustafa, for example, had frequently requested new posting orders when he was not accommodated like his coworkers. According to the Court, JK Handicrafts failed to follow the legal requirements outlined in Section 25F of the Act.
- Lubrizol and Polyhose Sign MoU to Manufacture Medical Tubing, Expand Capacity in Chennai - November 14, 2024
- After Seen 6.6% Rise of EPFO Contributors Government plans to hike EPF wage ceiling to Rs 21,000 - November 11, 2024
- Termination Of Service After Employee’s Retirement Unknown To Law In Absence Of Pending Departmental Proceedings: Patna High Court - November 5, 2024
