Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition No.1721/2011 was filed by the General Manager (Telecom) and Divisional Engineer (Telecom) of BSNL (the employer) challenging the order dated 20/01/2011 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur. Writ Petition No.3055/2011 was filed by the workman, Zarir S/o Pesi Mawalwala, and the union secretary seeking enforcement of the same order. The workman was initially appointed as a casual labourer on 21/01/1986 with the Chief General Manager, Railway Electrification Project Telecom, and later transferred to the Divisional Engineer Telecom, Microwave (Survey) from 1989. He was granted temporary status under the Casual Labourer (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme vide letter dated 02/03/1988. He worked with BSNL up to 25/06/1993. On 02/12/2002, BSNL terminated his services with immediate effect by a written order on payment of one month's pay. The workman raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to the Labour Court. The Labour Court answered the reference in favour of the workman, holding the termination illegal and directing reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The employer challenged this order in Writ Petition No.1721/2011, while the workman sought implementation in Writ Petition No.3055/2011. The High Court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the employer's petition and allowed the workman's petition, upholding the Labour Court's award. The court noted that the employer had not complied with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as the workman had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding year and was entitled to notice and compensation. The court also rejected the employer's argument that the workman had abandoned service, finding that the termination was by written order. The court held that the Labour Court's discretion in awarding full back wages was not perverse and did not warrant interference.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Termination of Service - Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Illegal Termination - The workman, a casual labourer with temporary status, was terminated without notice or compensation as required under Section 25F. The Labour Court held the termination illegal and ordered reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The High Court upheld the award, finding no perversity or error of law. (Paras 2-10)
B) Industrial Law - Reinstatement - Back Wages - Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Labour Court has discretion to award back wages. In this case, the workman had worked for over 240 days in the preceding year and the employer failed to comply with Section 25F. The High Court held that the award of full back wages was justified and not disproportionate. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the workman without complying with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was legal and justified, and whether the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with full back wages was proper.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed Writ Petition No.1721/2011 filed by the employer and allowed Writ Petition No.3055/2011 filed by the workman, upholding the Labour Court's order dated 20/01/2011 directing reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and full back wages.
Law Points
- Termination of a workman without complying with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 is illegal
- Reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages is the normal relief for illegal termination
- The Labour Court's discretion in awarding back wages should not be interfered with lightly under writ jurisdiction
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (07) 47
Writ Petition Nos.1721/2011 & 3055/2011
Mrs. B. P. Maldhure for petitioners in WP 1721/2011 and respondents in WP 3055/2011; Shri P. D. Meghe for respondent Nos.1 and 3 in WP 1721/2011 and petitioners in WP 3055/2011
The General Manager (Telecom) and The Divisional Engineer (Telecom) (in WP 1721/2011); Zarir S/o Pesi Mawalwala and Shri Y. R. Bagade (in WP 3055/2011)
Zarir S/o Pesi Mawalwala, The Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur, and Shri Y. R. Bagade (in WP 1721/2011); General Manager Telecom (Now Principal General Manager Telecom), BSNL and The Divisional Engineer Telecom (in WP 3055/2011)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging and seeking enforcement of an order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur, in an industrial dispute regarding termination of a workman.
Remedy Sought
In WP 1721/2011, the employer (BSNL) sought quashing of the Labour Court order dated 20/01/2011. In WP 3055/2011, the workman sought implementation of the same order.
Filing Reason
The employer challenged the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with full back wages to the workman, while the workman sought enforcement of the award.
Previous Decisions
The Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur, by order dated 20/01/2011, answered the reference in favour of the workman, holding the termination illegal and directing reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.
Issues
Whether the termination of the workman without complying with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was legal and justified?
Whether the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with full back wages was proper and should be upheld?
Submissions/Arguments
The employer argued that the workman had abandoned service and that the termination was not illegal.
The workman argued that his termination was without compliance with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and that he was entitled to reinstatement with back wages.
Ratio Decidendi
Termination of a workman who has worked for more than 240 days in the preceding year without complying with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (notice and compensation) is illegal. The Labour Court's discretion to award reinstatement with full back wages in such cases is not to be interfered with under writ jurisdiction unless perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
The above petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India take exception to the order dated 20/01/2011, by which the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Nagpur answered the Reference, which was referred to it for adjudication, in favour of the workman i.e. the petitioner No.1 in Writ Petition No.3055/2011.
It is the case of the petitioner No.1 that he was deprived of various facilities of the regular employees and suddenly on 02/12/2002 the BSNL terminated his services with immediate effect by written order on payment of one month's pay.
Procedural History
The workman was appointed as a casual labourer on 21/01/1986, granted temporary status on 02/03/1988, and terminated on 02/12/2002. He raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Nagpur. The Labour Court passed an award on 20/01/2011 in favour of the workman. The employer filed Writ Petition No.1721/2011 challenging the award, and the workman filed Writ Petition No.3055/2011 seeking its implementation. Both petitions were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 25F, 11A
- Constitution of India: 226, 227
