Term in the letter of appointment of managers that service can be terminated by either side giving notice of one/three months.Validity of such term.
Can the term be used without following principles of natural justice.

From India, Pune
PROFESSIONALS AND BUSINESSES PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION
Dinesh Divekar
Business Mentor, Consultant And Trainer
Jagadish347
Advocate
KK!HR
Management Consultancy

Dear Jagadish,

We do not know in what context you have raised your query. A little more background information could have brought clarity.

If the company wishes to terminate the services of the employee on disciplinary grounds, then it is incumbent on the company to follow the principles of natural justice.

Yes, you may give short shrift to the disciplinary procedure, however, by chance, if the terminated employee files a lawsuit, then the company may get entangled in the litigation. As you are well aware that court cases drag on the for the years. Under such circumstances, the cost of the half job could be greater than the cost incurred because of the process of discipline.

If the company adheres to the principles of natural justice, then the company can have a sense of comfort or relief, and the other party will think many times before proceeding with the litigation.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

From India, Bangalore
KK!HR
1289

In analysing the issue distinction has to be made between the public/Government sector and the Private Sector. As regards the public/Government sector such an action would be hit by Article 14 and Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India. In the case of Private Sector, again distinction between the workman category and others. As regards a person who is in workmen category as per the ID Act 1947, acquires a status on completion of 240 days of service and hence cannot be terminated using this clause. The termination of an employee who is not in the Supervisory/managerial cadre as per the Contract of Service mutually agreed between the employer and employee signifies a contract as per the Contract Act 1872 and is a valid and enforceable one. The Supreme Court in OP Bhandari Vs. ITDC (1987 AIR SC 111) has held that a Gold Collar employee can be discharged without questions being asked. In fact Justice Thakkar who authored the judgement called for such a regulation for the PSUs too at the highest level.
From India, Mumbai

If you are knowledgeable about any fact, resource or experience related to this topic - please add your views.







About Us Advertise Contact Us Testimonials
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2022 CiteHRŽ

All Material Copyright And Trademarks Posted Held By Respective Owners.
Panel Selection For Threads Are Automated - Members Notified Via CiteMailer Server