Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
VINOD GOEL, J.
MANAGEMENT OF HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD - Petitioner
Versus
AITA RAM & ORS - Respondents
W.P. (C) 5607 of 2016 & CMs 2731 of 2017, 1681, 16193 of 2018
Decided on : 27-08-2018
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947 - SECTION 25FF - REINSTATEMENT - CONTINUITY OF SERVICE - BACK WAGES - SECTION 25FFF - CLOSURE OF UNDERTAKING - JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - SCOPE AND EXTENT - WRIT OF CERTIORARI - SUPERVISORY JURISDICTION - PARAMETERS - EXERCISE OF - INDUSTRIAL ADJUDICATOR - POWER TO DIRECT REINSTATEMENT WITH CONTINUITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT BACK WAGES - CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS - WHETHER ENTITLED TO - PRINCIPLES.
Fact of the Case:
The workmen of HTL were transferred to its subsidiary HTML w.e.f. 02.10.2004 and their services were terminated under Section 25FF of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act). The Industrial Tribunal (IT) held that the transfer was illegal and unjustified and directed HTL to reinstate the workmen with continuity of service w.e.f. 03.10.2004. HTL challenged the award before the High Court, which upheld the award. HTL then issued notices to the workmen under Section 25FFF of the ID Act, claiming that the printing undertaking had been closed in 2005 and its name had been removed from the list of registered factories in 2008. The workmen challenged the notices before the Executing Court, which held that the termination of the workmen under Section 25FFF was nonest and that the workmen were entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 03.10.2004 and continuity of service. HTL challenged the order of the Executing Court before the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that: (i) The IT had rightly held that the transfer of the workmen to HTML was illegal and unjustified and that their termination under Section 25FF of the ID Act was illegal. (ii) The Executing Court had rightly held that the workmen were entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 03.10.2004 and continuity of service. (iii) The workmen were not entitled to back wages for the period from 03.10.2004 to 23.01.2012, as the IT had not granted them back wages and the SLPs filed by the workmen against the order of the Division Bench denying them back wages had been dismissed by the Supreme Court. (iv) The workmen were entitled to the benefits of continuity of service, including increments, ACP benefits, and notional pay fixation for the purpose of pension, gratuity, and contribution to the provident fund. (v) The action of HTL in issuing notices to the workmen under Section 25FFF of the ID Act was illegal and nonest, as the closure of the printing undertaking was based on the same plea of transfer/selling of printing undertaking to HTML and consequent closure of the printing unit and its removal from the register of the Factories. (vi) The High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, as the impugned order of the Executing Court was in excess of its jurisdiction and had resulted in a grave injustice to the workmen.
Issues: 1. Whether the transfer of the workmen to HTML was illegal and unjustified? 2. Whether the workmen were entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 03.10.2004 and continuity of service? 3. Whether the workmen were entitled to back wages for the period from 03.10.2004 to 23.01.2012? 4. Whether the workmen were entitled to the benefits of continuity of service, including increments, ACP benefits, and notional pay fixation for the purpose of pension, gratuity, and contribution to the provident fund? 5. Whether the action of HTL in issuing notices to the workmen under Section 25FFF of the ID Act was illegal and nonest? 6. Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The IT had rightly held that the transfer of the workmen to HTML was illegal and unjustified and that their termination under Section 25FF of the ID Act was illegal. 2. The Executing Court had rightly held that the workmen were entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 03.10.2004 and continuity of service. 3. The workmen were not entitled to back wages for the period from 03.10.2004 to 23.01.2012, as the IT had not granted them back wages and the SLPs filed by the workmen against the order of the Division Bench denying them back wages had been dismissed by the Supreme Court. 4. The workmen were entitled to the benefits of continuity of service, including increments, ACP benefits, and notional pay fixation for the purpose of pension, gratuity, and contribution to the provident fund. 5. The action of HTL in issuing notices to the workmen under Section 25FFF of the ID Act was illegal and nonest, as the closure of the printing undertaking was based on the same plea of transfer/selling of printing undertaking to HTML and consequent closure of the printing unit and its removal from the register of the Factories. 6. The High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, as the impugned order of the Executing Court was in excess of its jurisdiction and had resulted in a grave injustice to the workmen.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed. HTL was directed to deposit the wages of all the workmen, who have not yet attained the age of superannuation with benefit of continuity of service as per terms and conditions of service for the period from 01.01.2014 till 31.08.2018 as per the Award with the Executing Court within one month which shall be disbursed by the Executing Court to each workman individually. Petitioner is directed to implement the Award dated 23.01.2012 immediately and reinstate the workmen w.e.f. 03.10.2004 and provide them all the benefit of continuity of service as per terms and conditions of service as available to them before their termination on 03.10.2004 in terms of Award. The Executing Court shall execute the award in accordance with law.
VINOD GOEL, J.
1. It needs no emphasis that if a man is deprived of his livelihood, he is deprived of all his fundamental and constitutional rights and for him the goal of social and economic justice, equality of status and of opportunity, freedom enshrined in the Constitution remains illusory. Therefore, the approach of the Courts must be compatible with the Constitutional philosophy of which the directive principles of State policy constitute an integral part and justice due to the workman should not be denied by entertaining the specious and untenable grounds put forward by the employer-public or private. [Harjinder Singh V. Punjab State Warehousing Corpn. (2010) 3 SCC 192)].
2. The essence of our constitution as explained by eminent jurist Palkhivala was referred to in Harjinder Singh’s case (supra):-
“Our Constitution is primarily shaped and moulded for the common man. It takes no account of ‘the portly presence of the potentates, goodly in girth’. It is a Constitution not meant for the ruler
‘but the ranker, the tramp of the road,
The slave with the sack on his shoulders
pricked on with the goad,
The man with too weighty a burden,
too weary a load.’ ”
(N.A. Palkhivala, Our Constitution Defaced and
Defiled, MacMillan, 1974, p.29)”
3. Justice Vivian Bose, who was a part of the Constitutional Bench in Bidi Supply Co. Vs. Union of India AIR 1956 SC 479, posed the question “23. After all, for whose benefit was the constitution enacted?” Having posed the question, Justice Bose answered the same in the next sentence “23…….I am clear that the Constitution is not for the exclusive benefit of Governments and States; it is not only for lawyers and politicians and officials and those highly placed. It also exists for the common man, for the poor and the humble, for those who have businesses at stake, for the “butcher, the baker and the candlestick-maker”. It lays down for this land “a rule of law” as understood in the free democracies of the world. It constitutes India into a Sovereign Democratic Republic and guarantees in every page rights and freedom to the individual side by side and consistent with the overriding power of the State to act for the common good of all.”
4. The preamble to the Constitution of India says:-
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
“JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;”
The preamble to Constitution is a part of it and the objective specified in the preamble contain the basic structure of the Constitution as held in Keshavananda Bharati Sripadgalvaru Vs. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461.
5. The first part of the preamble is a declaration whereby the people of India adopted and gave to themselves the Constitution. The second part is a resolution whereby people of India solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLIC. The most vital part is the promise to secure to all its citizens
“Justice, social, economic and political;
Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
Equality of status and of opportunity;
And to promote among them all
Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the
unity and integrity of the Nation;”
(Justice R.C.Lahoti, Preamble-The Spirit and Backbone of the Constitution of India, Anundoram Barooah Law Lectures, Seventh Series, Eastern book Company, 2004, at p.3)
6. The judges have a vital role to ensure that the promise contained in the preamble to the constitution is fulfilled. It would not be out of place to refer to Article 38 (I) as under:-
“38. State to secure a social order for the promotion of welfare of the people- (1) The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by secu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
