Back
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Yunus Khan – Appellant
Versus
Haryana Roadways Through Its General Manager – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 21.03.2023 passed in W.P.(C.) No.8394/2004, the respondent in the writ petition has filed the present appeal.
2. Being aggrieved by an award dated 07.05.2003 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-1, Karkardooma courts directing the reinstatement of the Appellant in service with continuity of service, along with 25% backwages, the respondent preferred W.P. (C) No.8394/2004 in this Court.
3. The appellant was appointed as Seasonal Water Carrier on daily wages with effect from 03.05.1985 to 31.05.1985. The appointment order mentions that the services of the appellant was liable to be terminated at any point of time without any prior notice.
4. The Appellant employee was engaged for a period of three months and as his services were no longer required, he was terminated with effect from 15.09.1986.
5. The Appellant was again appointed vide order dated 08.10.1986 as a Peon on daily wages for a limited period with effect from 24.09.1986 to 23.10.1986, with the same terms and conditions. He was again appointed as a Peon from 24.10.1986 to 23.11.1986, and finally his engagement came to an end on 23.12.1986.
6.
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....
Termination of a workman on a contractual basis may not constitute retrenchment if the employment is of a permanent nature, and unfair labor practices may warrant compensation instead of reinstatemen....
The court upheld the illegal termination of the respondents/workmen and their entitlement to reinstatement with full back wages and other consequential benefits under the Industrial Disputes Act, 194....
Termination of contractual employment does not equate to retrenchment under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, limiting the right to claim reinstatement.
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 ....
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....
The court held that the termination of the workman was illegal as it violated mandatory retrenchment procedures, entitling him to reinstatement with full back wages.
there is a breach of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act and as there is a delay of 11 years in preferring the reference, instead of granting reinstatement a lump sum amount as full and final settlement wil....
The main legal point established is that even temporary employees can be considered 'workmen' under the Industrial Disputes Act, and termination without complying with Section 25(F) may entitle the e....
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
