LABOUR LAW

Labour Law Precedents

1.         Striking the name of the Workmen from Muster roll: It is settled law that striking off the name of a workmen from the muster roll/attendence register amounts to termination of service. Reference can be made to the judgment delivered on Delhi Cloth & General Mill Company Ltd. vs. Shamhhu Nath Mukherjee & Ors. AIR 1978 SC 8 wherein it was held that striking off the name of the workmen from roll amounts to retrenchment and compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Dispute Act (Condition precedent to retrenchment of workmen) is mandatory.

2.         Abandonment vs. Absentism: The Hon’ble High Court in M/s Fateh Chand vs. Presiding Officer of a Labour Court & Anr. 2012 LLR 468 Delhi held that mere continous absentism does not mean abandonment. It was observed that the voluntarily relinquishment of one’s service with intention of not resuming duty is abandonment while casual absence from duty is different. It was held that the absentism for a continuous period does not mean that the employee has abandoned his service. The management has to bring on record sufficient material to show that the employee has abandoned the service and abandonment cannot be attributed to the employee without there being a sufficient evidence. On the failure to report for the duty, the management has to call upon the employee and if he refuses to report, then the enquiry is required to be ordered against him and accordingly action taken. In the absence of anything placed on record by the management, no presumption against the respondent can be drawn.