Case Note & Summary
The judgment arises from two writ petitions filed by employees of Air India Limited (formerly NACIL) whose services were terminated under Standing Order 17 of the certified standing orders. The petitioners, a co-pilot and a cabin crew member, challenged their terminations as well as the constitutional validity of Standing Order 17 itself. The co-pilot was terminated after his Airline Transport Pilot License was suspended by the DGCA on allegations of obtaining it through forged documents, leading to an FIR. The cabin crew member was terminated after allegedly refusing to operate flights and raising safety concerns; he claimed the termination was retaliatory. Both terminations were effected without assigning any reasons, invoking Standing Order 17 which permitted termination of a permanent workman by giving 30 days' notice or wages in lieu. The common question framed was whether Standing Order 17 is ultra vires the Constitution. The petitioners contended that the provision is arbitrary, violates the right to livelihood and natural justice, and is a relic of the 'hire and fire' policy. They relied on Supreme Court precedents such as Manohar P. Kharkar v. P. Raghuraj, which struck down a similar regulation, and Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Ltd. v. Brojonath Ganguly, which termed such unfettered power a Henry VIII clause. An initial challenge that the certified standing orders had ceased to exist post-amalgamation was abandoned. The High Court heard the parties and reserved judgment on 4 February 2019, pronouncing it on 25 February 2019, but the final adjudication on constitutionality is not captured in the available excerpt.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination without assigning reasons - Constitutional Validity - Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, Standing Order 17 - The petitioners challenged Standing Order 17 of Air India's certified standing orders, which allowed termination of permanent workmen by 30 days' notice or wages in lieu without any reasons, as being ultra vires Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. They argued that the provision conferred unbridled and arbitrary power, akin to a Henry VIII clause, and violated principles of natural justice and right to livelihood, relying on Supreme Court decisions striking down similar provisions. (Paras 2, 11, 16) B) Industrial Law - Certified Standing Orders - Survival after amalgamation - The petitioners initially contended that the certified standing orders of Air India ceased to exist after the amalgamation of Air India and Indian Airlines into NACIL, based on an order of the Certifying Officer. This challenge was later abandoned, and the court did not delve into it. (Paras 12-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether Standing Order 17 of the Standing Orders of Air India Limited certified under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 is ultra vires the Constitution of India?
Law Points
- Standing Order 17 of Air India Limited
- which permits termination without assigning reasons
- is challenged as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Such unguided power is akin to a Henry VIII clause and offends principles of natural justice and right to livelihood.
