Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shri Jairaj N. Shetty, was employed as a Casual Cook in the Catering Section of the Commercial Department, Central Railway, Mumbai V.T. He joined service on April 21, 1988, and worked intermittently during various periods: 21.04.1988 to 30.06.1988, 07.08.1988 to 14.05.1989, 06.04.1990 to 30.06.1990, 02.05.1991 to 30.06.1991, 03.04.1993 to 30.04.1993, 16.05.1993 to 30.06.1993, and 07.04.1993 to 30.06.1994. His services were terminated with effect from 01.07.1994. The dispute regarding his termination was referred by the appropriate government to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.2. The Industrial Tribunal, by its award dated 09.04.1999, held that the termination was not legal and justified and directed the railways to reinstate the workman with continuity and pay him all back wages. The railways challenged the award by filing a writ petition. The learned Single Judge, by order dated 04.07.2003, allowed the writ petition and set aside the award, holding that the workman was not in continuous service in the year preceding the date of termination and had not completed 240 days of service. Aggrieved, the workman appealed to the Division Bench. The Division Bench heard the appeal and considered the issue of whether the workman had completed 240 days of continuous service in the year preceding termination under Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The court noted that the workman had worked from 07.04.1993 to 30.06.1994, which included the period from 01.07.1993 to 30.06.1994. The court found that the workman had worked for 240 days in that period and was entitled to the protection of Section 25F. The court held that the learned Single Judge erred in setting aside the award. The Division Bench allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge, and restored the award of the Industrial Tribunal dated 09.04.1999, directing reinstatement with continuity and full back wages.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Continuous Service - Section 25B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Computation of 240 days - The workman, a casual cook, worked intermittently from 1988 to 1994. The Industrial Tribunal held that the workman had completed 240 days in the year preceding termination (01.07.1993 to 30.06.1994) by aggregating service in that period. The learned Single Judge set aside the award, holding that the workman was not in continuous service. The Division Bench reversed, holding that the workman had worked for 240 days in the relevant period and was entitled to protection under Section 25F. (Paras 2-4) B) Industrial Law - Reinstatement and Back Wages - Section 11A of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Industrial Tribunal's award of reinstatement with continuity and full back wages was upheld by the Division Bench, as the termination was illegal for non-compliance with Section 25F. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the workman had completed 240 days of continuous service in the year preceding termination under Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and whether the learned Single Judge erred in setting aside the Industrial Tribunal's award of reinstatement with back wages.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 04.07.2003 is set aside. The award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.2 dated 09.04.1999 is restored. The workman is entitled to reinstatement with continuity and full back wages.
Law Points
- Continuous service
- Section 25B Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- 240 days in preceding 12 months
- back wages
- reinstatement
- casual worker
- railway
