Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Diwakar Madhukarrao Pande, was appointed as a Peon on 31.07.1992 by respondent nos. 1 and 2, Shri Shivaji Education Society and its Science College, Pauni. He possessed the requisite qualification of 10th standard pass. On 13.09.1997, with effect from 01.10.1997, the employer terminated his services. The petitioner alleged that the termination violated the mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act). Specifically, the employer did not comply with Section 25F (requiring notice and retrenchment compensation) and Section 25G (requiring observance of the 'last come first go' rule). The employer retained juniors namely Mr. Bawankar, Mr. Raut, and Mr. Chikhale while terminating the petitioner. The petitioner challenged his termination before the University and College Tribunal under Section 59 of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 21.06.2011, leading to the present writ petition. The respondents contended that the college is not an industry and the ID Act does not apply, and that the petitioner was a daily wager. The High Court held that the educational institution is an industry and the ID Act applies. The termination was illegal for non-compliance with Sections 25F and 25G. The court set aside the Tribunal's order and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service and 50% back wages from the date of termination till reinstatement, to be paid within three months.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Retrenchment - Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Mandatory Conditions - Termination of a peon without payment of retrenchment compensation and notice as required under Section 25F is illegal and void ab initio - The employer, an educational society, is an industry and bound by the ID Act - Held that non-compliance renders the retrenchment invalid (Paras 3-5). B) Industrial Law - Last Come First Go - Section 25G of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Violation - Employer retained juniors while terminating the petitioner, breaching the principle of 'last come first go' - Such violation makes the retrenchment unsustainable - Held that the employer must follow the rule of seniority in retrenchment (Paras 3-5). C) University Law - Appeal - Section 59 of Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Jurisdiction of University and College Tribunal - The Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain appeals against termination by educational institutions - However, the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the mandatory provisions of the ID Act - Held that the Tribunal's order is perverse and liable to be set aside (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioner (peon) by the respondent educational society was illegal for non-compliance with Sections 25F and 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and whether the University and College Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's order dated 21.06.2011, and directed reinstatement of the petitioner with continuity of service and 50% back wages from the date of termination till reinstatement, to be paid within three months.
Law Points
- Retrenchment without compliance with Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act is illegal
- Principle of 'last come first go' under Section 25G of Industrial Disputes Act
- Educational institution can be an industry under Industrial Disputes Act
- University and College Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 59 of Maharashtra Universities Act
- 1994
