Supreme Court holds that Regularization By Management Does Not Give Any Right To Retrenched Employee For Claiming Re-Employment
Section 25 H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1948 (“IDA”) discusses the preferential right to be granted to retrenched employees at the time of fresh employment. The Section states that if the employer offers fresh employment, then the retrenched employees (if citizens of India), shall have the right to apply for such fresh employment and will be given preference over other applicants.
The Supreme Court (“SC”), in the case of Barara Coperative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Limited v. Workman Pratap Singh observed that regularization of an employee already in service does not give any right to retrenched employee to invoke Section 25 H of the IDA for claiming re-employment.
The SC, in this case, made a distinction between fresh employment and regularization of an existing employee and held that the latter will not constitute fresh employment. The SC held that Section 25 H of the IDA will only be applicable for fresh employment and not regularization.
Quick Views:
The ruling of the Supreme Court gives additional clarity on the instances where a retrenched employee may trigger Section 25 H of the IDA. The Supreme Court has also impressed upon the important distinction between regularization and offering fresh employment by way of this ruling.
Madras HC stays ban on online sale of medicines.
A division bench of the Madras High Court (“Madras HC”), on January 02, 2019 stayed the order of a single judge of the Madras HC passed on December 21, 2018 which banned the online sales of drugs till the Central Government notified the Draft e-pharmacy regulations.
The division bench was of the opinion that a sudden ban on e-pharmacies would have a negative impact on patient health care. It observed that people are not always in the position to go out and buy the medicines.
Quick View:
- The order of the Madras HC will allow e-pharmas to carry on their business for the time-being. However, it is pertinent to note that the order passed by the Madras HC is a temporary stay and that the final hearing for this petition is scheduled to be held on January 24, 2019. Therefore, the relief may be short-lived for e-pharmas.
Kerala HC – Maternity benefits cannot be denied to contractual employees
The Kerala High Court (“Kerala HC”) in the case of Rasitha C.H v State of Kerala has held that contractual employees cannot be denied of maternity benefits. In the present case, the petitioner was a contractual employee of a university whose contract stipulated that she could only take 15 (Fifteen) days of casual leave a year.
The Kerala HC ruled that maternity leave are not merely statutory rights or right flowing out of an agreement, but rather, are attached to the dignity of a woman. It was therefore, held that irrespective of the contract the petitioner has signed, the university would have to give the petitioner maternity leave.
Quick View:
The Ministry of Labour & Employment had previously issued a clarification on April 12, 2017, where it was stated that the Maternity Benefits Act is applicable to all women who are employed in any capacity, directly or through any agency i.e. contractual or consultant employment. The Kerala HC has rightly held that contractual employees cannot be denied of maternity benefits. We believe that it is important for all employers to understand the intent behind Maternity Benefits Act and provide their employees with the intended benefits.
Small Restaurants file petition before the CCI against Swiggy, Zomato, FoodPanda and UberEATS for alleged misuse of Dominant Position
On the back of allegations of Swiggy, Zomato, FoodPanda and UberEATS indulging in misuse of dominant position, deep discounting, in-house kitchens and internal sourcing to take away the business of small and mid-sized restaurants, a petition has been filed before the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”).
The Petition asked the CCI to “put an end to unsustainable pricing by these Food-Tech companies, prohibition of cross holding services”. Further, it also prays for appointment of food regulators to ensure that a level playing field is provided in this cut throat competition. These small restaurants also have asked CCI to ensure that these companies do not have stakes in any kitchen/restaurants.
Quick View:
- Similar complaints filed by small retailers against Flipkart and Amazon have been dismissed by the CCI. In such a case, there is a probability that the CCI will follow a similar rationale. The Central Government, however, in response to the retailers complaints against Flipkart and Amazon, recently issued amended rules for e-commerce The Central Government may issue similar rules to protect the interests of small restaurants.