Case Law Details
Case Name : Nandram Vs Garware Polyster Ltd (Supreme Court of India)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
Supreme Court of India
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Rasu Sharma
Employee Aggrieved By His Termination Can Move Labour Court Where He Had Been Employed Or Where The Company Headquarters Is Located: SC
A. Brief Facts of the Case:
A.1 In this case, a supervisor (hereinafter referred to as the “Appellant“) was employed in the Puducherry Unit by the Respondent Company (hereinafter referred to as the “Respondent“) having its Registered Office in Aurangabad. The Puducherry Unit was closed and there was dispute over termination of the Appellant.
A.2 Aggrieved by the termination, he moved the Aurangabad Labour Court. The Respond...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.
2 Comments
Cancel reply
Mostly an MNCs. having various manufacturing units at various locations and at various States.
Workers who are aggrieved by the action of the Management cannot approach the corproate h.q. or H.O. jurisdiction. Hon. Apex court rightly rules that the PLACE OF WORK is the jurisdiction apart from the Company H.O. .It should be noted that the workers who are aggrieved cannot afford to go from pillar to post. The Place of work should be the jurisdiction as righly decided by hon. Apex Court. Poor worker in the present case cannot be expected or afford to travel to Aurgabad for his legal case all the way.