- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Labour Court sets aside dismissal of employee and directs the Company to pay back 50% wages along with reinstatement in 90 days
Labour Court sets aside dismissal of employee and directs the Company to pay back 50% wages along with reinstatement in 90 days The Labour Court has criticized the tactics adopted for termination of employees and set aside the dismissal of an employee of IT Firm- Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) and it also ordered 50% payment of wages along with reinstatement of the employee within 90...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
Labour Court sets aside dismissal of employee and directs the Company to pay back 50% wages along with reinstatement in 90 days
The Labour Court has criticized the tactics adopted for termination of employees and set aside the dismissal of an employee of IT Firm- Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) and it also ordered 50% payment of wages along with reinstatement of the employee within 90 days
In 1995 'X' an employee joined TCS as an Associate Consultant and rendered service for more than 22 years. In 2017, 'X' fell ill and she communicated about it to the Human Resources team (HR) over the phone and also submitted her medical records.
It was alleged by 'X' that even after submitting all requisite medical records TCS on 2 June 2017, dismissed her from employment without accepting her valid explanations on health grounds. 'X' approached the Labour Court and stated that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act were not followed by TCS and her employment was terminated illegally.
TCS argued that 'X' couldn't be allocated to any project owing to her inability to upgrade subject knowledge and requisite skill sets. It was also mentioned that 'X' remained unallocated for 727 days from 7 March 2015 till the date of her dismissal from her services and that she had availed salary benefits, without having worked for over two years.
The matter was listed before N Venkatavaradhan, the Presiding officer, I Additional Labour Court. It was observed by the Labour Court that there is no evidence to the allegations by TCS that 'X' has not improved her standards as required by the management.
The Labour Court set aside the dismissal of the experienced IT Professional 'X', who was with a major IT Firm- TCS for more than twenty years and directed the company to reinstate the staff and pay 50 % back wages.
It was stated, "It is a tactic adopted by the management to find reasons for termination." The Court directed the management to reinstate 'X' within 90 days and pay 50 % backwages and other benefits from the date of termination.