Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment directing payment of salary for the period 01 January 2015 to 31 May 2018 – Held that respondents had attained superannuation age by 2013 and 2015, respectively.

Case Note & Summary

The age of superannuation must be considered when determining entitlement to back wages and reinstatement benefits. (Paras: 8, 9, 10)

Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in ignoring the factual aspect of the respondents’ superannuation age. Set aside the High Court judgment and the Deputy Labour Commissioner’s order.

1. Major Acts and Provisions:

Constitution of India (COI)

Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (UPIDA), Section 6H(1)

Subjects:

Superannuation

Back Wages

Industrial Dispute

Reinstatement

Labour Court

High Court

Nature of Litigation:

Civil Appeal arising out of Writ Petition (Writ C No. 14303 of 2021) filed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench.

Relief Sought:

U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. sought to set aside the order of the Deputy Labour Commissioner directing payment of salary for the period 01 January 2015 to 31 May 2018.

Reason for Filing the Case:

Allegation of wrongful and illegal termination of service and non-payment of wages for the period post-2014.

Prior Decisions: a. Labour Court, Faizabad – Award dated 07 December 1995 – Held termination illegal – Ordered reinstatement with salary and other benefits. b. Deputy Labour Commissioner, Devi Patan Division, Gonda – Order dated 05 April 2021 – Directed payment of ₹6,53,302/- to each respondent for the period 01 January 2015 to 31 May 2018. c. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench – Judgment dated 20 February 2023 – Upheld Deputy Labour Commissioner’s order.

Issues:

Whether the respondents were entitled to salary and other benefits for the period from 01 January 2015 to 31 May 2018 despite their likely attainment of the superannuation age.

Submissions/Arguments: a. Appellants contended that the respondents had already attained the superannuation age by 2013 and 2015, respectively. b. Respondents argued they were entitled to continuous service and benefits till 2023 based on the Labour Court’s 1995 award.