More light has been thrown on the problem of habitual absenteeism in Pandurang Vithal Kevne v Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) & Union of India. Bombay High Court has reiterated that habitual absence from the workplace without sanctioned leave for long periods amounts to employee misconduct.
Kevne had worked as an examiner with BSNL since 1977 until his services were terminated by the company due to misconduct in relation to unauthorized absenteeism. Kevne appealed against the termination order to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal in Mumbai, which held that the termination on the charge of misconduct was valid.
Kevne is alleged to have remained absent for a total of 355 days, 285 days and 245 days in the years 1995, 1996 and 1997 respectively, without prior permission or intimation to his employer. However, the absence was validly explained by Kevne, and BSNL regularized these leave days by sanctioning different types of leave (earned, half-pay, casual, annual and unpaid leave). BSNL admitted that it also awarded a penalty of pay reduction to Kevne for a period of one year without cumulative effect for remaining absent from duty.
You must be a
subscribersubscribersubscribersubscriber
to read this content, please
subscribesubscribesubscribesubscribe
today.
For group subscribers, please click here to access.
Interested in group subscription? Please contact us.
你需要登录去解锁本文内容。欢迎注册账号。如果想阅读月刊所有文章，欢迎成为我们的订阅会员成为我们的订阅会员。
The legislative and regulatory update is compiled by Nishith Desai Associates, a Mumbai-based law firm. The authors can be contacted at nishith@nishithdesai.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
