Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, I.T.M. Vocational University, challenged the judgment and award dated 01.08.2023 passed by the Labour Court, Vadodara in Reference (LCV) No. 554 of 2017. The respondent-workman, Naginbhai Jethabhai Parmar, joined the petitioner University in June 2012 as an Operator (Non-Teaching Staff). His services were terminated by an oral order on 01.07.2016. Aggrieved, the workman filed a Claim Form (Exh.-4) before the Labour Court seeking a declaration that the termination was illegal, unlawful, and bad in law. The petitioner filed a detailed Written Statement on 23.09.2019. After hearing the parties and examining oral and documentary evidence, the Labour Court partly allowed the Reference and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondent with continuity of service along with 50% backwages. The petitioner, being aggrieved, filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The High Court considered the submissions of both sides. The petitioner argued that the Labour Court erred in granting 50% backwages without considering that the workman did not prove he was unemployed after termination. The respondent supported the award. The High Court found that the Labour Court had correctly held the termination illegal as it was oral and without any inquiry. The court noted that the workman had worked for about four years and his termination was in violation of principles of natural justice. Regarding backwages, the court observed that the Labour Court had exercised discretion in awarding 50% backwages, which was not excessive or perverse. The High Court held that no interference was warranted under Article 227 as the award was just and proper. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed and the Labour Court's award was upheld.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Illegal Termination - Oral Termination - Reinstatement with Backwages - The workman was terminated orally on 01.07.2016 without any domestic inquiry or compliance with Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - The Labour Court held the termination illegal and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% backwages - The High Court upheld the award, finding no perversity or error of law (Paras 1-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court was justified in directing reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% backwages for the workman whose services were terminated orally without any inquiry.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the Labour Court's award dated 01.08.2023 directing reinstatement of the respondent-workman with continuity of service and 50% backwages.
Law Points
- Oral termination is illegal
- Reinstatement with continuity of service
- 50% backwages
- No domestic inquiry required for illegal termination
- Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
