Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ petition filed by the State of Maharashtra and the Executive Engineer, Kukadi Irrigation Division, challenging an award dated 14-01-1991 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ahmednagar in Reference (IDA) No. 96 of 1988. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nashik Division had made a reference under Section 10(1) read with Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for adjudication of an industrial dispute between the workman, Vasant Rambhau Bhosale, and the employer (the petitioners). The workman was employed as a daily wager with the Irrigation Division. His services were terminated without compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court, after considering the evidence, held that the termination was illegal and directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and full back wages. The petitioners challenged this award in the High Court under writ jurisdiction. The High Court examined the submissions of both sides. The petitioners argued that the workman was not a permanent employee and that the termination was justified. The respondent workman supported the Labour Court's award. The High Court found that the Labour Court had properly appreciated the evidence and that the findings were not perverse. The court held that the termination was illegal for non-compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The High Court also held that the Labour Court had discretion to award back wages and that the same was not interfered with. The court concluded that there was no ground to interfere with the award in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Termination of Service - Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Illegal Termination - The workman was employed as a daily wager and his services were terminated without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court found the termination illegal and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. The High Court upheld the award, holding that the Labour Court's findings were based on evidence and not perverse. (Paras 1-6)
B) Industrial Law - Reinstatement - Back Wages - Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Labour Court awarded full back wages to the workman. The High Court held that the Labour Court had discretion to award back wages and the same was not interfered with as the termination was illegal and the workman was entitled to relief. (Paras 5-6)
C) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 227 of Constitution of India - Scope of Interference - The High Court held that in writ jurisdiction under Article 227, the court can interfere only if the findings of the Labour Court are perverse or based on no evidence. Since the Labour Court's award was based on evidence and proper appreciation, no interference was warranted. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court's award directing reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and back wages is legal and proper, and whether the writ petition challenging the same should be allowed.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Labour Court's award dated 14-01-1991 directing reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and full back wages.
Law Points
- Termination of workman without compliance with Section 25-F of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 is illegal
- Reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is proper relief for illegal termination
- Labour Court's award based on evidence and findings of fact not to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 281
Writ Petition No. 1290 of 1991
Smt. K.G. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for Petitioner No. 1; Shri. G.B. Rajale, Advocate for Petitioner No. 2; Shri. S.R. Choukidar, Advocate for Respondent No. 1
State of Maharashtra and Executive Engineer, Kukadi Irrigation Division No. 7, Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar
Vasant Rambhau Bhosale and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ahmednagar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the award of the Labour Court directing reinstatement of a workman with continuity of service and back wages.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners (State of Maharashtra and Executive Engineer) sought to quash and set aside the Labour Court's award dated 14-01-1991.
Filing Reason
The petitioners challenged the Labour Court's award on the ground that the termination of the workman was justified and the award of reinstatement with back wages was illegal.
Previous Decisions
The Labour Court, Ahmednagar, in Reference (IDA) No. 96 of 1988, passed an award on 14-01-1991 directing reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and full back wages.
Issues
Whether the termination of the workman was illegal for non-compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947?
Whether the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is proper?
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Labour Court's award in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners submitted that the workman was not a permanent employee and his termination was justified. They argued that the Labour Court erred in directing reinstatement with back wages.
The respondent workman supported the Labour Court's award, contending that the termination was illegal and the award was based on evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The termination of a workman without compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is illegal. The Labour Court has discretion to award reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. The High Court, in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, will not interfere with findings of fact based on evidence unless they are perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
This Writ Petition takes exception to the Award and order dated 14-01-1991 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ahmednagar in Reference (IDA) No. 96 of 1988.
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nashik Division, Nashik made reference to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ahmednagar Under Section 10(1) read with 12(5) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 for adjudication of the industrial dispute between the workman and the employer i.e., between the present petitioner and respondent No. 1.
The Labour Court after considering the evidence on record held that the termination of the workman was illegal and directed his reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.
In the present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the said award.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.
In the present case, the Labour Court has recorded a finding that the termination of the workman was illegal and directed his reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The said finding is based on evidence and is not perverse. Therefore, no interference is called for in the present writ petition.
Procedural History
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Nashik Division made a reference under Section 10(1) read with Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Labour Court, Ahmednagar for adjudication of an industrial dispute between the workman Vasant Rambhau Bhosale and the employer (State of Maharashtra and Executive Engineer). The Labour Court passed an award on 14-01-1991 directing reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 1290 of 1991 in the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad challenging the award. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on 06-01-2010.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 10(1), Section 12(5), Section 25-F
- Constitution of India: Article 227
