If the employee is not covered under the definition of the 'workman' in accordance with section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 then he (employee) is entitled to have one month notice or notice pay which ever the case may be according to the Delhi Shops Act. If both the acts are applicable simultaneously then the action taken under I D Act will prevail.
opinion submitted as requested.
12th July 2009 From India, Delhi
Can he quote your opinion while replying to the legal notice served by his company.Can you offer legal/labor consultancy service in this regard to him.If yes please call me at 09246475056 and please let know your contact details
13th July 2009 From India, Hyderabad
In either case the factual situation will be as under:
He is covered under the Delhi Shops & Esatbalishments Act. Under the circumstances, since he has already worked for more than three months, one month's Notice Period or One Month's salary in lieu of such Notice is mandatory. The Delhi Shops Act stipulates that if an employee has worked for three months or more, he is obliged to give One Month's Notice to the Employer in case he resigns. Likewise if his services are terminated by the management, he will have to be given One Month's Notice or One Month's Salary in lieu thereof.
It will also be appropriate to visit his Appointment Letter and consider the stipulations contained therein. If the terms and conditions governing "termination/resignation" are more favourable, then follow those.
Please feel free to contact me anytime for any HR related issue.
13th July 2009 From India, Mumbai
13th September 2012 From India, Chennai