Case Note & Summary
The case involves a challenge by the Deputy Conservator of Forest and other forest officials (petitioners/employer) against the judgment and order of the Industrial Court at Bhandara dated 14.11.2005 in Revision (ULPA) No. 106 of 2005. The respondent employee, Anwar Ali Khan, was initially appointed as a driver on 21.01.1983 and was terminated on 21.12.1984. After litigation, he was reinstated on 18.05.1998 pursuant to an order of the Industrial Court in Revision ULPA No. 83 of 1986. He worked till 24.04.1999 and was then orally terminated with effect from 23.08.1999. The respondent filed Complaint (ULPA) No. 16 of 1999 before the Labour Court at Gondia under Section 28 read with Item 1 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU and PULP Act). The Labour Court allowed the complaint on 10.10.2005, holding that the employer engaged in unfair labour practice under Item 1(a) and (b) of Schedule IV, and directed reinstatement with continuity and full backwages. The employer filed Revision (ULPA) No. 106 of 2005 before the Industrial Court at Bhandara, which on 14.11.2005 set aside the order of backwages but maintained reinstatement with continuity and directed the employer to provide an alternate job on par with the driver's job by protecting salary or wages. The employer filed the present writ petition on 15.01.2009, after a delay of about five years. The High Court granted interim stay on 08.04.2009. The main legal issues were whether the Industrial Court erred in law in its directions and whether the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The petitioners argued that the respondent was not a workman and that the Industrial Court's order was perverse. The respondent contended that the petition was barred by delay and laches and that the Industrial Court's order was just and proper. The High Court analyzed the facts and found that the delay of five years in filing the writ petition was not satisfactorily explained, and the petition was liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. On merits, the Court held that the Industrial Court had not committed any error of law in setting aside the backwages but maintaining reinstatement with continuity and directing an alternate job with protected salary. The Court noted that the respondent had been out of service since 1999 and the order of reinstatement was just. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Industrial Court's order.
Headnote
A) Labour Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Oral Termination - Reinstatement - The respondent employee was orally terminated from service as driver with effect from 23.08.1999. The Labour Court held the employer engaged in unfair labour practice under Item 1(a) and (b) of Schedule IV of M.R.T.U and P.U.L.P Act and directed reinstatement with full backwages. The Industrial Court in revision set aside backwages but maintained reinstatement with continuity and directed alternate job with protected salary. The High Court upheld the order, finding no error of law. (Paras 1-5) B) Labour Law - Delay and Laches - Writ Petition - The writ petition was filed after a lapse of five years from the Industrial Court order. The High Court held that the delay was not satisfactorily explained and the petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. (Para 2) C) Labour Law - Alternate Job - Protected Salary - The Industrial Court directed the employer to provide an alternate job on par with the driver's job by protecting salary or wages. The High Court found no error in this direction as it was within the court's discretion. (Paras 2, 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court erred in law in setting aside the order of backwages but maintaining reinstatement with continuity and directing alternate job with protected salary, and whether the writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Industrial Court dated 14.11.2005. The interim relief granted earlier was vacated.
Law Points
- Unfair labour practice
- oral termination
- reinstatement with continuity
- backwages
- alternate job
- delay in filing writ petition
- MRTU and PULP Act
