Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mother Dairy Fruit and Vegetable Pvt Ltd, filed five Special Civil Applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, challenging the common order dated 27.12.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Anand. The Labour Court had partly allowed Reference (L.C.A) Nos.103, 104, 105, 106, and 107 of 2015, ordering reinstatement of the respondents (workmen) on their original posts with continuity of service. The petitioner-employer contended that the workmen had voluntarily abandoned their employment and that the Labour Court had failed to consider the evidence on record. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the Labour Court had not properly appreciated the evidence regarding abandonment. The court noted that the employer had produced documents showing that the workmen did not report for duty despite being given opportunities. The High Court held that the Labour Court's order was perverse and not sustainable. Consequently, the court quashed and set aside the impugned orders and dismissed the references. The petitions were allowed.
Headnote
A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Reinstatement - Burden of Proof - The Labour Court erred in ordering reinstatement without properly considering the employer's evidence that the workmen had voluntarily abandoned their employment. The burden lies on the workman to prove that the termination was illegal and that there was no abandonment. (Paras 2-10) B) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Abandonment of Service - Voluntary Abandonment - The employer adduced evidence showing that the workmen did not report for duty despite opportunities, which constitutes voluntary abandonment. The Labour Court failed to appreciate this evidence. (Paras 11-15) C) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Reinstatement - Discretion of Labour Court - Reinstatement is not an automatic remedy even if termination is found to be illegal. The Labour Court must consider all circumstances, including the conduct of the workman and the feasibility of reinstatement. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court was justified in ordering reinstatement with continuity of service without considering the employer's evidence that the workmen had voluntarily abandoned their employment.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petitions, quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated 27.12.2019 passed by the Labour Court, Anand, and dismissed the references.
Law Points
- Reinstatement not automatic even if termination is illegal
- burden of proof on workman to show unfair labour practice
- abandonment of service is a valid defence
- Labour Court must consider employer's evidence of voluntary abandonment
