#proportionality of punishment

Bombay High Court upholds dismissal under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act for chronic absenteeism without medical proof, overturning a Labour Court's order for 50% backwages. The ruling reinforces that proportional punishment for unauthorized absence does not require reinstatement or full backwages, impacting employer disciplinary actions in service law disputes.

Bombay High Court rules that chronic absenteeism without medical proof warrants lump-sum compensation instead of reinstatement, modifying the Labour Court's award. The judgment underscores that employers are not obligated to retain employees with prolonged unauthorized absence, even in industrial disputes.

The Gauhati High Court has ruled that employees with decades of unblemished service cannot be dismissed and stripped of gratuity based solely on unexplained stock shortages without proof of individual dishonesty or malicious intent. This reinforces the principle of proportionality in disciplinary action and protects long-serving public employees from punitive overreach absent culpable conduct.

The Bombay High Court ruled that termination for negligent driving cannot override the mandatory reinstatement mandate under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, unless the position entails fiduciary responsibility. Back wages were denied due to the petitioner’s post-termination employment, reinforcing that reinstatement and back pay are distinct remedies. This clarifies the limits of 'loss of confidence' as a justification in non-fiduciary roles.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that removal from service for an unauthorized search is disproportionate, violating principles of natural justice. The court emphasized procedural lapses and acquittal in the criminal case, mandating reconsideration of penalty for police personnel.

Kerala High Court holds that removal from service for unauthorised absence must consider mental health, procedural fairness, and proportionality, even if leave was denied.