Dear sir
I am medical representative in sanofi pharma company . company managements are threatening for transfer to any where in india .11 dec 2014 my regional bussiness manager call me delhi & told ok you join delhi 1 jan 2015.after that i registered the 2k case in conciliation office udaipur .and 21 august 2015 managements are said to conciliation office that i am right & failed the report and 21 august 2015 report was failure .1. how much day required for written a failure report ?2. after that can company transfer to praveen its right or wrong?3.if praveen not join in delhi than company have a right to terminate.?4.it is a volition of section 33a And 25 T Also ?5.he want stay order , any rules for stay order Against Melafied transfer .6.labour commissioner can authorized for stay order against transfer & volition of section 33a & 25t.
sir do the need fully .
regards
From India, Udaipur
I am medical representative in sanofi pharma company . company managements are threatening for transfer to any where in india .11 dec 2014 my regional bussiness manager call me delhi & told ok you join delhi 1 jan 2015.after that i registered the 2k case in conciliation office udaipur .and 21 august 2015 managements are said to conciliation office that i am right & failed the report and 21 august 2015 report was failure .1. how much day required for written a failure report ?2. after that can company transfer to praveen its right or wrong?3.if praveen not join in delhi than company have a right to terminate.?4.it is a volition of section 33a And 25 T Also ?5.he want stay order , any rules for stay order Against Melafied transfer .6.labour commissioner can authorized for stay order against transfer & volition of section 33a & 25t.
sir do the need fully .
regards
From India, Udaipur
Transfer is an incidence of service. It is the employer's prerogative and discretion to decide who is to work where and how long depending upon the requirements of work. However, such an exercise of discretion is regulated either by the certified Standing Orders of the establishment or the terms of the contract of employment. So, if any aspersions of malafides or victimisation or disregard of the Standing Orders or violation of the specific terms of the contract of employment could be cast upon the orders of transfer, the employee, if he is a workman, has the right to raise a dispute against the employer u/s 2k of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947. At the same time, raising of a dispute or its pendency against such orders of transfer, ipso facto, can not prevent the employer from implementing it or instituting disciplinary action against the employee for non-compliance of the transfer orders. However, the employer's right to punish the concerned employee for having disobeyed the orders of transfer by way of dismissal or otherwise is subject to the the restrictions imposed by by Sec.33 of the I.D Act,1947. It is a must that the employer should obtain prior permission or post-approval as the case be from the concerned authority before whom the dispute is pending as on the date of the employer's such final decision. There is no provision for stay against such an order. IF it is held to be violative of the provisions of sec.33 upon a complaint made u/s 33-A, it has to be set aside by the authority so as to render it inoperative.
From India, Salem
6018From India, Salem
sir i written application they are following;
To,
The Labour Commissioner
Labour Department,
Jaipur.
Applicant:
RMSRU,Udaipur unit,Udaipur through its Unit secretary Mr. Surendra singh ,Office shirali Bhawan,Machhla magra,opposite Paras Mahal Hotel,Udaipur in respect of Sh.Praveen kumar .
V/s
Respondents:
Sr. Director, Human Resources , Sanofi India ,Ltd., Sanofi House,CTS.NO.117-B,L&T business park,saki vihar road,Pawai,Mumbai-400072 and ors.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 33-A OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT,1947.
1.That Mr.Praveen kumar was appointed on the post of S.S.E. on 30.12.2011.He was given Posting at sheoganj headquater.
2.That in the month of December ,2013,Praveen kumar submitted an application for taking membership of Hoechst All India Representative committee(hereinafter referred to as the HAIRC.).This is the committee undeartaking work in the Welfare of the Medical representative and allied posts.
3.That after the application Was submitted By Sh.Praveen kumar and started threatening him that if he joins the union,he will have to face dire consequences and he will be transferred to Delhi or at any other Distant place .
4.That he was granted membership of the said union on 1.4.2015 by the company .
5. That considering the Threatening given by the officials of the company ,Praveen Kumar raised an industrial dispute before the conciliation and the said proceedings are Pending before the conciliation and the said proceedings are pending before the Conciliation Officer.
6.That Section 33 of the industrial Disputes Act,1947(hereinafter referred to as the act of 1947) Provides for conditions of Service etc . to remain unchanged under certain circumstance .Section 33(1) of the Act of 1947 provides that during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding Before a conciliation officer or a board or of any proceeding before of an industrial dispute ,no employer shall(a) In regard to any metter connected with the dispute,alter ,to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such dispue, the conditions of such proceeding.
7. That Section 33-A of the Act of 1947 provides for special provision for adjudication as to whether condition of service etc. Changed during pendency of proceedings.Section 33-A provides that where an employer contravenes the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of proceedings before a conciliation officer ,Board an arbitrator ,Labour Court ,Tribunal or National Tribunal ,any employee aggrieved by such contravention ,may make a complaint in writing in the prescribed manner to such conciliation officer or board and the conciliation officer4 or Board shall take such complaint into account in mediating in and promoting the settlement of such industrial dispute .
8.That Section 33 of the industrial Disputes Act ,1947 provides that during the pendency of the proceedings ,conditions of services in respect of conditions of service to the dispute cannot be changed . I have already stated in the dispute that I have been threatened to be transferred and after the membership was granted by the company,I have been transferred absolutely on laconic and irrelevant ground vide order date.16.9.2015. to Delhi on the ground that the productivity of Udaipur territory is very low. In this regard.I may submit that the transfer order is absolutely malafied and is actuated with malice on account of the fact that I have joined the Union. After I joined the Union,I was not given any target ,but despite this I achieved the target on the basis of earlier months,which is evident from the target-sheet.
9. That since I have been Transferred during the pendency of the dispute and the Company cannot transfer me during the pendency of the dispute , I am submitting the present application under Section 33-A of the Act for quashing the transfer order and during the pendency of the present application ,the operation the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly Be stayed.
It is,therefore ,prayed that this application under Section 33-A of the Act of 1947 may kindly be quashed and the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly be quashed and during the pendency of the present application ,the operation of the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly be stayed .
2. sir can i take help of high court for stayed ??
From India, Udaipur
To,
The Labour Commissioner
Labour Department,
Jaipur.
Applicant:
RMSRU,Udaipur unit,Udaipur through its Unit secretary Mr. Surendra singh ,Office shirali Bhawan,Machhla magra,opposite Paras Mahal Hotel,Udaipur in respect of Sh.Praveen kumar .
V/s
Respondents:
Sr. Director, Human Resources , Sanofi India ,Ltd., Sanofi House,CTS.NO.117-B,L&T business park,saki vihar road,Pawai,Mumbai-400072 and ors.
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 33-A OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT,1947.
1.That Mr.Praveen kumar was appointed on the post of S.S.E. on 30.12.2011.He was given Posting at sheoganj headquater.
2.That in the month of December ,2013,Praveen kumar submitted an application for taking membership of Hoechst All India Representative committee(hereinafter referred to as the HAIRC.).This is the committee undeartaking work in the Welfare of the Medical representative and allied posts.
3.That after the application Was submitted By Sh.Praveen kumar and started threatening him that if he joins the union,he will have to face dire consequences and he will be transferred to Delhi or at any other Distant place .
4.That he was granted membership of the said union on 1.4.2015 by the company .
5. That considering the Threatening given by the officials of the company ,Praveen Kumar raised an industrial dispute before the conciliation and the said proceedings are Pending before the conciliation and the said proceedings are pending before the Conciliation Officer.
6.That Section 33 of the industrial Disputes Act,1947(hereinafter referred to as the act of 1947) Provides for conditions of Service etc . to remain unchanged under certain circumstance .Section 33(1) of the Act of 1947 provides that during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding Before a conciliation officer or a board or of any proceeding before of an industrial dispute ,no employer shall(a) In regard to any metter connected with the dispute,alter ,to the prejudice of the workmen concerned in such dispue, the conditions of such proceeding.
7. That Section 33-A of the Act of 1947 provides for special provision for adjudication as to whether condition of service etc. Changed during pendency of proceedings.Section 33-A provides that where an employer contravenes the provisions of section 33 during the pendency of proceedings before a conciliation officer ,Board an arbitrator ,Labour Court ,Tribunal or National Tribunal ,any employee aggrieved by such contravention ,may make a complaint in writing in the prescribed manner to such conciliation officer or board and the conciliation officer4 or Board shall take such complaint into account in mediating in and promoting the settlement of such industrial dispute .
8.That Section 33 of the industrial Disputes Act ,1947 provides that during the pendency of the proceedings ,conditions of services in respect of conditions of service to the dispute cannot be changed . I have already stated in the dispute that I have been threatened to be transferred and after the membership was granted by the company,I have been transferred absolutely on laconic and irrelevant ground vide order date.16.9.2015. to Delhi on the ground that the productivity of Udaipur territory is very low. In this regard.I may submit that the transfer order is absolutely malafied and is actuated with malice on account of the fact that I have joined the Union. After I joined the Union,I was not given any target ,but despite this I achieved the target on the basis of earlier months,which is evident from the target-sheet.
9. That since I have been Transferred during the pendency of the dispute and the Company cannot transfer me during the pendency of the dispute , I am submitting the present application under Section 33-A of the Act for quashing the transfer order and during the pendency of the present application ,the operation the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly Be stayed.
It is,therefore ,prayed that this application under Section 33-A of the Act of 1947 may kindly be quashed and the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly be quashed and during the pendency of the present application ,the operation of the order dtd.16.9.2015 may kindly be stayed .
2. sir can i take help of high court for stayed ??
From India, Udaipur
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Tax Saving on Medical Reibursement under section 17(2) .pdf