Mbapublisher.de

MS-28   Dec-2008

MS-28 : LABOUR LAWS

1. What are the provisions of Retrenchment in the Industuial Disputes Act, 1947 ? Discuss the recommendations of Second National Commission on labour retrenchment.

2. Briefly describe the concept and processes of Domestic Enquiry in Industry.

3. Discuss the concept of "arising out of and in course of employment" stipulated in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923. Give examples to make your arguments convincing.

4. What are authorised deduction, giu"n in the Payment of Wages Act, L936 ? Why are such provisions made in the Act ?

5. Write short notes on any three of the following :

(a) Eligibility for gratuity

(b) Equal pay for equal work

(c) Charge sheet

(d) Award and Settlement

(e) Employee Pension Scheme, 1995

6. Briefly describe the concept of writs and appeals under the Indian Constitution.

What is the meaning of the term "factory" under The Factories Act, 1948 ? Explain the procedure for approval, licensing and registration of factories.

7. Explain briefly the objectives, scope-and coverage of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. Discuss the powers of inspectors under the Act.

8. Define "Trade union", and discuss the procedure for the registration and cancellation of a trade union under the Trade Union Act. 1926.

5. Write short notes on any three of the following :

(a) Social justice

(b) Registration of establishment

(c) Lay-off

(d) Dismissal and discharge

(e) Principles of 'Set on' and 'Set off' under

f)   Payment of Bonus Act, 1965

6. Read the following case and answer the questions given at the end :

On March 25, 1996 at about 6.45 PM, the Duty Officer (Security), Kumar, at the Works gate informed Rathod, Electrical Engineer on telephone that one Narayan, superisor of his department has been caught red-handed at the Works gate while attempting to steal one small electric motor and certain other spare parts used in the Electrical Dept. Rathod was requested to come to the Security Control Room, where a preliminary enquiry was to be held. During the preliminary enquiry, it came to light that Narayan, Personnel No. 5824, Foreman, came to the Works gate at 6.15 PM on his Suvega autocycle bearing registration no. BRX 1421 (the number was not clearly visible). The works guard on duty, Krishna Bahadur asked Narayan to stop and open the tool-box that was hanging on the right side of the rear wheel. When it was opened, only one empty tiffin-box was found. Since the driver's seat appeared to be thicker and of unusual size, the works guard enquired about the same from Narayan, and not being satisfied with the reply, gave it a jerk. It was found that Narayan had constructed one box under the seat where a 0.50 HP motor and eight 5 amps switches belonging to the company were concealed. On being asked, Narayan replled that he had attended a break-down after 5 PM in the Mill and replaced one 0'50 HP motor. The motor that was recovered was the defective one, but he could not return it as the store-issuer had already left for home after his duty which ended at 5 PM. He thought he would return the motor next day, as he had done many times in the past. He, however, could not explain why he was carrying the 5 amps switches. Nor did he give any satisfactory reason for not keeping the materials in the tool-box that was visible from outside, rather than where these were kept. On checking up at the Security Control Room, it was found in the presence of Narayan, that the electric motor recovered was in working condition. As per the Company's Certified Standing Order No. 23(iii),

'theft, fraud, or dishonesty in connection with company's business or property' is a

misconduct.

Questions :

(a) Does this case deserve suspension, pending enquiry ?

(b) Advise the Works Manager on the steps for handling the above case.

MS-28   Dec-2009

MS-28 : LABOUR LAWS

1. Describe the concept and philosophy of labour laws. Explain the effects of social—economic conditions on Labour Laws.

2. Discuss the scope and applicability of the contract labour (Regulation and abolition) Act, 1986. Describe the employer's obligation to provide amenities to workers under the Act.

3. Discuss the concept of domestic enquiry. Briefly explain the process of domestic enquiry. Illustrate.

4. Explain the applicability of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. Describe various benefits covered under the Employees State Insurance Scheme.

5. Write short notes on any three of the following :

a) Equal Remuneration Act, 1976

b) Plantation labour Act, 1951

c) The payment of Gratuity Act, 1972

d) Fundamental Rights and Labour Legislations

(e) Health and Safety under the Mines Act, 1952

6. Discuss the concept and definition of the Contract Labour under the contract labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. Describe the obligations of principal employers to provide certain amenities to workers under the Act.

7. Explain the concept and nature of standing orders. Describe the Acts of misconduct in Model Standing orders.

8. Discuss the scope and coverage of the payment of wages Act, 1936. Explain the employers responsibility for payment of wages under the Act.

9. Describe the applicability of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961. Explain the benefits payable to a female employee under the Act.

10. Write short notes on any three of the following :

a) Charge sheet

b) Eligibility for Gratuity

c) Employee pension scheme, 1995

d) Registration of establishment

(e) Duties of conciliation officer under I.D. Act, 1947

11. Read the following case and answer the questions given at the end.

Sriram was employed as a badli technical mate in the Pune-Miraj Railway construction. He had worked for about two years continuously in that capacity. He was subsequently selected for employment on one of the construction sites at a different place in Andhra for a tenure of two years.

He was properly relieved immediately but was not paid any sums - either as settlement or as terminal benefits. Also, the travelling expenses were not borne by the earlier construction organisation, though he was paid his wages till the date of relief. At the new place Sriram worked for two years and the period was further extended by another two years (total four years). On completion of four years of service, Sriram came and offered his services again in the Pune-Miraj construction and since he was an excellent worker he was taken again as a badli worker, but this time on regular monthly scales of pay with appurtenant benefits, since orders had by then come from the concerned Ministry that whoever had put in a continuous service of more than six months should be given the pay and other benefits though they are badli workers. This was the position with other workers also who were either retrenched and taken back or were continued. There were about 500 such workmen.

A situation however arose that Sriram had to be deployed, at this time to a lower grade and post as a regular measure but he refused stating that it was not suitable to him. Sriram was retrenched for refusing to accept alternate employment in the lower grade. This termination came to him after two years of his present appointment as a technical mate.

Sriram approached the higher authorities but they said that since no post was available in

the higher grade, even as a badli supervisor, either he has to take up his post in the lower grade as a regular measure or face retrenchment. Sriram pointed out that there are vacancies in similar grade of different category - as Draftsman – and that based on his qualification, he can be fitted in. Sriram also pointed out that the situation of retrenchment would not have at all come in, if he was considered when a regular vacancy in his grade category came up during his tenure appointment in another construction. The

organisation pointed out that once he has left a particular site, he ceases to have any connection and that he was taken as a badli supervisor only on humanitarian grounds.

   Sriram made a counter argument that his services cannot be treated as terminated, on his return from tenure post as he is presently carrying forward his services in the previous unit itself. Accepting employment afresh, was due to circumstances beyond his control and because management was adamant otherwise. He also argued that in as much as his settlement was not made, nor was he given any compensation, he cannot be stated to have been retrenched at all.

He also said, if he was treated as retrenched, he would have become the junior most and that as per Sec. 25 of I.D. Act he would not have been eligible for being considered again at all. The management argued that he could have claimed relief immediately and not after six years. Sriram went to Labour Court and the administration had put forward the same arguments. With arguments and counter arguments, the matter was dragged at the conciliation stage for about seven/eight months.

The conciliation officer submitted failure report with recommendation for reference to Tribunal/ Labour Court. The matter came up before the Labour Court. Management took a stand in the Court that Sriram was retrenched before posting to the other construction site, and has been paid all dues.

   Management however, expressed its inability to produce any record and their contention was that statutorily, it is not required to maintain any record under Payment of Wages Act, for more than three years, after the payment of retrenchment compensation. Sriram had also no grounds for claiming past seniority. Sriram argued that unless facts are proved by documents, cash vouchers and retrenchment order and other receipts, etc., before the Court as per the Government rules which makes it obligatory to produce documents, he cannot be considered as having been retrenched and he has a claim for the post which fell vacant during his tenure posting in another construction site.

Questions :

a) Assuming that the organisation has not paid Sriram his dues including the retrenchment compensation before posting to the tenure post, can the organisation refuse any employment to him on return, when the agreement does not speak anything to this effect ?

b) Does the employee lose his right of claim of past seniority simply because he was away for four years and then was taken afresh ?

c) What should be the relief available to the aggrieved workman if the Court is convinced that Sriram's dues have been settled before proceeding on the tenure post

to another construction site ?

d) What should be done if it is found that Sriram's dues prior to joining the tenure

post, was not settled nor was Sriram shown as retrenched on records ?

MS-28   Dec-2010

MS-28 : LABOUR LAWS

i purchased ms-28 book from mehta solutions quality book solutions

MS-28   Dec-2011

MS-28 : LABOUR LAWS

1. Explain the impact of ILO's conventions and recommendations on labour legislation in India.

2. Discuss the Scope and Coverage of the Mines Act, 1952. Explain in detail the enforcement of the Act.

3. Explain the concept and nature of standing orders  under the Industrial Employment (Standing orders) Act, 1946. Describe the concept of misconduct under the Act.

4. Discuss the concept of bonus under the payment of Bonus Act, 1965. Explain the concepts of sums mentioned in the third schedule to be deducted from gross profits.

5. Write short notes on any three of the following :

(a) Social justice

(b) Maternity Benefit Act, 1961

(c) Prohibitions under the child labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986.

(d) Retrenchment

(e)The Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.

6. Read the following case and answer the questions given at the end.

M/S. Krishna Trading, a road transport company of Calcutta has a fleet of trucks for carrying -steel scrap-cuttings from various industrial organisations in Jamshedpur to a

number of iron and steel foundries around Kolkata. Since the scrap is to be collected from various points at regular intervals, the company sends each truck with one driver and a cleaner-cum -khalasy. Its resident representative at Jamshedpur coordinates in the collection of scrap from various locations. Scrap is generally loaded into the truck with the help of an overhead crane belonging to the company selling the scrap. At the time of weighing of the empty truck, loading of the material, as well as the time when the loaded truck is weighed, a representative each of the Security Department, Accounts Department (Weigh Bridge) and of the Department to which the scrap belonged, are present and a record of weights kept in a Weighment Register. Since the contractor is interested to get the material loaded quickly on the truck, his representative has to keep

good relations with the crane drivers and the security staff. Things were going on well till Kali Charan, representative of M/S. Krishna Trading informed N. Raman, manager of the factory on February 2, 2004 in the morning hours that the crane driver Ramu has threatened to damage the truck by dropping the scrap from a height unless he is given Rs. 50 per truckload. The security havildar K.P. Singh also demanded Rs. 50 per truckload to expedite loading and weighment. Kali Charan also complained that on earlier occasions, he used to pay Rs. 20 to the crane driver and Rs. 30 to the security havildar per truck to avoid delay in loading and weighment. Raman was concerned over the dishonest behaviour of his employees and called the Security Officer, Capt. Ranjit Singh. Raman put his initials on ten ten-rupee new currency notes and gave the same to Kali Charan for handing over to Havildar K.P. Singh and Ramu on demand for their so-called services. He also advised Capt. Ranjit Singh to lay a trap to catch these employees. On completion of the loading at about 11.00 AM on February 2, 2004, Ramu was given five ten-rupee notes, and after the weighment Havildar K.P Singh was given another five ten-rupee notes earlier signed by Raman. After the loaded truck was escorted outside the works at about 11.05 AM, Capt. Singh called Havildar K.P. Singh and Ramu to the Security Office where apart from Raman and Kali Charan,

Administrative Officer Goel was also present. In their presence, Capt. Singh asked Havildar K.P. Singh and Ramu to take out whatever money they had with them. In the process, all the signed currency notes were recovered. At the instance of Raman, Goel took down the statements of the following persons :

1. Kali Charan

2. K.P. Singh

3. Ramu

4. Capt. Ranjit Singh

Both Havildar K.P. Singh and Ramu admitted their guilt and begged apology, but refused to put their signatures on the written statement. There was a prima facie case against both K.P. Singh and Ramu.

As per the Company's Standing Order No. 23 (iii) "Taking or giving bribe or illegal  gratification whatsoever" is a misconduct.

Questions :

(a) Advise Raman as to the nature of action to be taken against K.P. Singh and Ramu.

(b) Advise Raman as to the merits and demerits of holding a domestic enquiry.

(c) Suggest to Raman various steps to be taken in a disciplinary proceeding.

(d) Also suggest to him the types of punishments which are normally awarded in case of misconducts.