IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Gaurang Kanth, J.
Bank of Baroda – Appellant
Versus
Naseem Ahmed – Respondent
W.P.(C) 8865 of 2005 and C.M. No. 6677 of 2005 and W.P.(C) 11357 of 2005
Decided On : 02-05-2023
VIOLATION - Industrial Disputes Act - Section 25-G, 25-H - The court found lack of evidence for violation of Section 25-G and H of the I.D. Act.
Fact of the Case:
The workman was terminated by the management, leading to an industrial dispute regarding his re-employment and entitlement to back wages.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Labour Court exceeded the scope of reference by ordering the workman's absorption based on a settlement, and failed to consider the specific terms of reference.
Ratio Decidendi: The court set aside the impugned award, citing lack of evidence for violation of relevant sections of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Result: The Petitioner/Management was directed to include the workman's name in the panel of temporary peons for possible absorption, without entitlement to back wages or continuity of service.
JUDGMENT
Gaurang Kanth, J.
1. This Court, proposes to dispose of the present writ petitions, vide this common Judgment:
(i) In these Writ petitions, the respective petitioners are impugning the award dated 1.3.2005 ("impugned award"), passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court-II Rajendra Bhawan, Ground Floor, Rajendra Place New Delhi in I.D. No. 15/97.
(ii) Vide the impugned Award, the learned Labour Court was pleased to hold that the Respondent/Workman is entitled for absorption as peon within one month from the date of publication of the impugned Award at the basic pay and other benefits as existing. In case the Petitioner do not appoint the Workman within one month after the publication of the Award, he will get interest @ 12% per annum over his back wages which will accrue from the date of appointment. Learned Labour Court further clarified that the Workman will not be entitled for the benefit of continuity of service.
(iii) Being aggrieved by the direction of the learned Labour Court to absorb the Respondent/Workman within one month after the publication of the impugned Award, the Petitioner/Management preferred W.P(C) No. 8865/2005. Since the learned Labour Court denied the benefit of backwages and continuity of service, the Respondent/ Workman preferred W.P(C) No.11357/2005.
2. For the sake of convenience, this Court refers the facts and other relevant orders from W.P(C) No.8865/2005.
3. The workman, Shri Naseem Ahmed ("Respondent/ Workman") was engaged by the Vijaya Bank ("Petitioner/Management") as a peon on 08.05.1986. His services were terminated by the Petitioner/Management on 21.04.1988. A settlement was signed between the Union representing the employees and the Petitioner management in 1988 ("1988 settlement") pertaining to the absorption of the temporary workmen in the Bank. Terms of settlement is reproduced herein below:
"1. ELIGIBILITY
(a) All temporary workmen who worked as peons for aggregate period of 60 days or more in the Bank during the period between 1-1-1983 and 30-6-1988 are eligible to apply to the bank for continuation for regular employment as peons in the Bank. However, in respect of those temporary workmen who were working as temporary peons on 1-1-1983 or 2-1-1983, if 1-1-1983 happened to be a holiday, temporary service put in by them prior to 1/21-1983, as the case may be, shall be reckoned for the purpose of computing total number of days of temporary service put in by the temporary peons. For the purpose of computation of number of days on which a temporary peon has actually worked in the Bank shall include the intervening weekly holidays and holidays declared under the Negotiable instruments Act.
(b) All the eligible candidates shall submit an application to the Bank as per proforma in Annexure-I, to this Settlement, so as to reach the Bank not later than 60 days from the date of this Settlement..."
4. In pursuance of the aforesaid 1988 settlement, circular no.166/88 dated 19.08.1988 was issued by the Petitioner management regarding the absorption of the temporary peons. Contents of the circular is reproduced below:
"With a view opportunity to such of these temporary employees who have worked as temporary peons in the bank for a period of 90 days or more in the past and also with a view to have a cordial and harmonious industrial relations in the bank, an arrangement has been evolved as a one time measure, after fruitful discussions with the two recognized workman unions, viz., Vijaya Bank Workers Organization and Vijaya Bank Employees Association. Accordingly, a settlement has been signed with the representatives of the said unions on 19th August, 1988 in this regard.
The terms of the Settlement is enclosed to this Circular as ANNEXURE A. One copy of the Annexure A should be displayed in the branch/office Notice Board.
In this regard the branches/offices are advised as under :
1. All temporary employees who have worked during the period from 1-1-1983 to 30-6-1988 sho
Termination without notice or compensation violates the Industrial Disputes Act; recognition of continuous service applies despite temporary engagement gaps.
Non-renewal of contract does not amount to retrenchment under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the I.D. Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Petitioner failed to prove that the termination was in violation of Section 25-H of the I.D. Act.
Point of law :Labour Law - There is no proof that the workman has worked for 240 days and, therefore, it was held by the Labour Court that there is no proof that the workman was working continuously ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the definition of 'retrenchment' under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act in determining the....
Violation of provisions under Sections 25F and 25H of the ID Act led to the direction for reinstatement without backwages.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the employer must follow the relevant provisions of the I.D. Act before terminating the service of an employee, and failure to do so may entit....
Service - There is no retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2(oo) of the I.D. Act, but, it is end of service due to contractual appointment and, therefore, Section 2(oo)(bb) of the I.D. Act woul....
In a case where Section 25-F of the Act applies the workman is bound to prove that he had been in continuous service of 240 days during twelve months preceding the order of termination; in a case whe....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.