Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Employment Termination Case — Quashes Labour Court's Order. The Supreme Court found that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to set aside the termination approved by the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947.

In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation appealing against a judgment by the High Court that upheld a Labour Court's decision to set aside the termination of a workman, Bharat Singh Jhala. The workman, who served as a Conductor, was terminated in 2001 after a departmental enquiry found him guilty of misconduct for not issuing tickets despite collecting fares. The Corporation sought approval for this termination under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, which was granted by the Industrial Tribunal in 2015 after allowing both parties to present evidence. However, 19 years later, the workman's legal heirs raised an industrial dispute challenging the termination, leading to the Labour Court's ruling in 2019 that set aside the termination and awarded back wages. The Corporation's appeal to the High Court was dismissed, prompting the current appeal to the Supreme Court. The appellant argued that the Labour Court erred in disregarding the Tribunal's approval of the termination, while the respondents contended that the proceedings under Section 33(2)(b) were distinct from those under Section 10 of the I.D. Act. The Supreme Court found that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to overturn the Tribunal's decision, which had attained finality, and thus quashed the Labour Court's order. The appeal was allowed, and no costs were awarded.

Headnote

A) Employment Law - Termination of Services - Approval of Termination - Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, Section 33(2)(b) - The Supreme Court held that once the Industrial Tribunal approved the termination after due process, the Labour Court could not later set aside this order based on a fresh reference under Section 10 of the I.D. Act. The court emphasized the binding nature of the Tribunal's findings and quashed the Labour Court's order (Paras 6-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Labour Court erred in setting aside the order of termination approved by the Industrial Tribunal after a significant delay.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the Labour Court's order setting aside the termination, and confirmed the approval of termination by the Industrial Tribunal.

Law Points

  • Industrial Dispute Act
  • 1947
  • Section 33(2)(b)
  • Section 10
  • departmental enquiry
  • approval of termination
  • binding nature of tribunal findings
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (09) 304

Civil Appeal No. 6942 of 2022

2022-09-30

M. R. Shah, Krishna Murari

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Bharat Singh Jhala (Dead) Son of Shri Nathu Singh, through Legal Heirs & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the Labour Court's decision to set aside termination of employment.

Remedy Sought

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation sought to quash the Labour Court's order.

Filing Reason

The Labour Court set aside the termination order after 19 years.

Previous Decisions

The Industrial Tribunal had approved the termination in 2015.

Issues

Whether the Labour Court had jurisdiction to set aside the termination approved by the Industrial Tribunal. Whether the delay in raising the dispute affects the validity of the termination.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the Labour Court erred in setting aside the termination approved by the Industrial Tribunal. The respondents contended that the proceedings under Section 33(2)(b) and Section 10 of the I.D. Act are distinct.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the findings of the Industrial Tribunal, which approved the termination after a proper enquiry, were binding and could not be overturned by the Labour Court.

Judgment Excerpts

The High Court has committed a very serious error in dismissing the writ petition/writ appeal confirming the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court setting aside the order of termination. Once the order of termination was approved by the Industrial Tribunal on appreciation of evidence led before it, thereafter the findings recorded by the Industrial Tribunal were binding between the parties.

Procedural History

The appellant filed an application for approval of termination under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act, which was approved by the Industrial Tribunal in 2015. The workman later raised a dispute which was decided by the Labour Court in 2019, setting aside the termination. The High Court dismissed the appeal against the Labour Court's decision, leading to the current appeal in the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Industrial Dispute Act, 1947: Section 33(2)(b), Section 10
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Considers Input Relief Eligibility Under Central Excise Rules — Need for Larger Bench. The court emphasized the necessity of strict compliance with exemption notifications under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in OBC Reservation Case — Upholds High Court's Order for Job Allocation.