Judgment :-

R.M. Lodha, J.

The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, by special leave, is where the workman had worked for only eight months as daily wager and his termination has been held to be in contravention of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘ID Act’), whether the direction to the employer for reinstatement with continuity of service and 25 per cent back wages is legally sustainable.

2. We were not disposed to undertake the detailed exercise but the same has become necessary in view of very vehement contention of Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the respondent (workman), that reinstatement must follow where termination of a workman has been found to be in breach of Section 25-F of ID Act. He heavily relied upon three decisions of this Court in L. Robert D’Souza v. Executive Engineer, Southern Railway and Another [(1982) 1 SCC 645], Harjinder Singh v. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation [(2010) 3 SCC 192] and Devinder Singh v. Municipal Council, Sanaur [(2011) 6 SCC 584] .

3. On behalf of the appellant, Ms. Shobha, learned counsel, challenged the finding of the Labour Court that the respondent had worked for 240 days