Back
A. S. SUPEHIA, MAUNA M. BHATT
Yogeshbhai Zala – Appellant
Versus
Mundra Port And Special Economic Zone Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER :
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865, is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in the captioned writ petition, wherein and whereby the respondent-Port has assailed the award dated 02.03.2019 passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (T) No.383 of 2015. By the said award, the Labour Court has directed the respondent to reinstate the appellant-workman in service with 25% back-wages.
2. The learned Single Judge has altered the reinstatement with 25% back-wages to that of awarding an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Jigar D. Dave, appearing for the appellant – workman has submitted that the appellant-workman may be ordered to be reinstated in service, instead of payment of compensation. He has alternatively submitted that an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- is too meagre and the same may be enhanced.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Jigar Dave, has further submitted that in fact, before the Labour Court, the respondent – Port was ready and willing to appoint the workman as an Operator on contractual basis at Chhatisg
The court established that under Section 25FFF of the Industrial Disputes Act, compensation is the exclusive remedy for termination due to closure of an undertaking.
Closure of business does not constitute retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, reaffirming that termination due to closure is outside statutory definitions of retrenchment.
Once violation of Sections 25(F), (G) and (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act is established, reinstatement should follow, as per the decision in Gauri Shanker vs. State of Rajasthan.
The court has the discretion to mold relief under Section 30(1) based on the circumstances, including the closure of the company, and may award compensation in lieu of full reinstatement with back-wa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the consequences of an illegal closure are statutorily prescribed, and the workmen are entitled to all the benefits under any law for the time....
Relief by way of reinstatement with backwages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a given fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescrib....
Monetary compensation, not reinstatement, is appropriate for daily wage workers upon finding illegal terminations; reinstatement is not automatic even when procedural violations are confirmed.
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
