Supreme Court Modifies Compensation Order in Unfair Labour Practices Case Due to Extended Temporary Employment. Unfair Labour Practices Established as Employees Deprived of Permanent Status Under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.

  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute involved Bajaj Auto Limited and its former employees who claimed unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The employees, engaged as temporary workers since 1990, alleged that their services were terminated after seven months each year, preventing them from achieving permanent status. The Industrial Court found that the company had indeed engaged in unfair labour practices, leading to a compensation order based on the number of years worked. The company contested this decision, arguing that it had not engaged in unfair practices and that the evidence relied upon was insufficient. The High Court upheld the Industrial Court's findings, leading to further appeals. The Supreme Court analyzed the evidence and the legal principles involved, ultimately modifying the compensation amount while affirming the finding of unfair labour practices. The court emphasized the importance of fair treatment in employment and the need for employers to adhere to just practices. The modified compensation was set at 65 days' salary for each year worked, with specific calculations based on the last drawn salary. The court also noted that the employees had already withdrawn amounts under previous orders, preventing the company from recovering any differential sums. The judgment was delivered on April 4, 2013, with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Labour Law - Unfair Labour Practices - Definition and Application - Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, Section 28 - The court held that the appellant-company had engaged in unfair labour practices by employing temporary workers for extended periods without granting them permanent status, violating the provisions of the Act. The Industrial Court's findings were upheld, leading to a compensation order for the affected employees (Paras 16-21).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant-company engaged in unfair labour practices and the appropriate compensation for affected employees.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court modified the compensation order to 65 days' salary for each year worked, affirming the finding of unfair labour practices under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971.

Law Points

  • unfair labour practices
  • temporary employees
  • permanency
  • Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act
  • 1971
  • Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act
  • 1945
  • res judicata
  • compensation calculation
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (SC) (04) 19

Civil Appeal Nos. 2159-2160 of 2012

2013-04-04

Dipak Misra, K. S. Radhakrishnan

J.P. Cama, Atul B. Dakh, Uday B. Dube

Bajaj Auto Limited

Rajendra Kumar Jagannath Kathar & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Dispute regarding unfair labour practices and compensation for temporary employees.

Remedy Sought

Employees sought a declaration of unfair labour practices and compensation.

Filing Reason

Employees claimed they were denied permanent status due to unfair practices.

Previous Decisions

Industrial Court found in favor of employees, upheld by High Court.

Issues

Whether the appellant engaged in unfair labour practices. What is the appropriate compensation for affected employees?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that no unfair practices were adopted and evidence was insufficient. Respondents contended that the Industrial Court's findings were justified based on evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court upheld the findings of unfair labour practices based on the evidence presented, emphasizing the need for fair treatment of employees and the importance of adhering to statutory provisions regarding employment status.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant-company had indulged itself in unfair labour practice under item No. 6 of Schedule IV of the 1971 Act. The calculation would be made on the basis of work during a calendar year and that the calendar year in which a complainant may not have worked at all would be kept out of consideration while calculating the amount.

Procedural History

The Industrial Court ruled in favor of the employees, which was upheld by the High Court. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to the current judgment.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971: Section 26, Section 27, Section 28
  • Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1945:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Requests Expedited Disposal of Writ Petition on Seniority Dispute. The court emphasized the need for timely resolution of the pending Writ Petition regarding seniority fixation of Assistant Section Officers, allowing provisional promoti...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appellant in Property Dispute Due to Non-Payment of Full Consideration. Title Not Passed as Payment Condition Precedent Not Met Under Section 54 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882.