Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Nirtubai w/o Jayantilal Mahule, challenged the Award dated 7-12-2011 passed by the Labour Court, Gondia, in Reference (IDA) No. 02 of 2001, which answered the reference in the negative, holding that there was no employer-employee relationship between the petitioner and the respondents (Head Master, Higher Grade Marathi Girls School, Gondia, and Zilla Parishad, Gondia). The Labour Court framed Issue No. 1 as: 'Whether the Party No.1 employer proves that there is no relation of employer and employee in between Party No.1 and Party No.2?' and answered it in the affirmative. The petitioner contended that the burden of proof was wrongly placed on the employer. The High Court examined the decision of the Apex Court in Workmen of Nilgiri Coop. Mkt. Society Ltd. v. State of T.N., (2004) 3 SCC 514, which held that the burden of proving the existence of an employer-employee relationship lies on the person who asserts it. The High Court noted that the Labour Court's framing of the issue was erroneous as it cast the burden on the employer. However, the High Court found that the employee had not adduced any evidence to prove the relationship, and the employer had produced evidence to show that the employee was not employed by them. Therefore, the ultimate finding of the Labour Court that no relationship existed was correct. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Labour Court's award.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Burden of Proof - Employer-Employee Relationship - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The burden of proving the existence of an employer-employee relationship lies on the person who asserts it, not on the employer. The Labour Court's issue framing that the employer must prove no relationship was erroneous, but the ultimate finding that no relationship existed was upheld as the employee failed to discharge her burden. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court erred in placing the burden of proof on the employer to disprove the existence of employer-employee relationship, and whether the finding of no relationship was correct.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Labour Court's Award dated 7-12-2011 in Reference (IDA) No. 02 of 2001.
Law Points
- Burden of proof
- employer-employee relationship
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Labour Court
- reference
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (02) 168
Writ Petition No.1575 of 2013
Shri M.P. Jaiswal for Petitioner; Shri A.Y. Kapgate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2; Shri A.M. Deshpande, AGP for Respondent No.3
Smt. Nirtubai w/o Jayantilal Mahule
Head Master, Higher Grade Marathi Girls School, Gondia; Zilla Parishad, Gondia; Judge, Labour Court, Gondia
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the Award of the Labour Court in a reference under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the Labour Court's Award which answered the reference in the negative, holding no employer-employee relationship.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the Labour Court's finding that there was no employer-employee relationship between her and the respondents.
Previous Decisions
The Labour Court passed an Award dated 7-12-2011 in Reference (IDA) No. 02 of 2001, answering the reference in the negative.
Issues
Whether the Labour Court erred in framing the issue placing the burden of proof on the employer to prove no employer-employee relationship.
Whether the finding of the Labour Court that there was no employer-employee relationship is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the Labour Court wrongly placed the burden of proof on the employer.
The respondents supported the Labour Court's finding that no employer-employee relationship existed.
Ratio Decidendi
The burden of proving the existence of an employer-employee relationship lies on the person who asserts it, not on the employer. The Labour Court's erroneous framing of the issue does not vitiate the ultimate finding if the employee fails to discharge her burden.
Judgment Excerpts
The burden of proof being on the workmen to establish the employer-employee relationship an adverse inference cannot be drawn against the employer that if he were to produce books of accounts they would have proved employer-employee relationship.
Where a person asserts that he was a workman of the company and it is denied by the company, it is for him to prove the fact. It is not for the company to prove that he was not an employee.
Procedural History
The Labour Court, Gondia, passed an Award on 7-12-2011 in Reference (IDA) No. 02 of 2001, answering the reference in the negative. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.1575 of 2013 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the Award.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947:
