Judges : SUKUMARAN
Joseph - Appellant
Versus
Mathruboomi Printing & P.Co.Ltd. - Respondent
Case No : O.P. No. 3716 of 1986
Decided On : 10/14/1988
Advocates Appeared :
P.F. Thomas; C.V. Antony; For Petitioner E.R. Venketeswaran; For Respondents
Compositor - Employment Termination - Transferability of Employee - [TRANSFERABILITY] - [EMPLOYMENT TERMINATION] - [Standing Orders Act, Sections 1-27; Kundan Sugar Mills v. Ziya Uddin & Others, 1960 (1) LLJ. 266; Automotive Manufacturers v. Nanalal Panchand,1977 Lab. I. C. 1188] - The court discussed the principles of transferability of employees in private employment, emphasizing the need for mutual agreement or implied terms for transferability. It highlighted the distinction between private and government employment, where unilateral alteration of terms is inconceivable in private employment. The court also emphasized the need for communication of intention to transfer to the employee and the absence of statutory provision interdicting transfer in the Standing Orders Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Compositor, was terminated from employment after being asked to transfer to a distant establishment. The petitioner contested the transfer, citing lack of legal competence for the management to effect the transfer.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the transfer was neither lawful nor reasonable based on the legal principles of transferability in private employment. It concluded that the dismissal of the employee was unjustified and nonest, entitling the employee to continue in service and granting the possibility of backwages for the intervening period.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the legality and reasonableness of the transfer of the employee to a distant establishment, and the subsequent termination of employment based on refusal to obey the transfer order.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the legal principles of transferability in private employment, the need for mutual agreement or implied terms for transferability, and the absence of statutory provision interdicting transfer in the Standing Orders Act.
Final Decision: The court quashed the award of the Labour Court, declared the dismissal as unsustainable and nonest, and allowed the petitioner to continue in service. It also directed the Labour Court to expedite a decision on the backwages of the intervening period within an outer limit time of four months.
1. A Compositor - (one who 'puts black on to white', as Gantier, the French writer would picture him) sent out from service by a mighty printing establishment the Mathrubhoomi and tired by a wearisome and long litigation, has come before the Court. He was in service for about 18 years. He is now out of employment for about eight years.
The termination of his employment was unjust, is his complaint. That did not, however, appeal to the Labour Court which looked into it. A fundamental flaw vitiated the Labour Court decision, is what is urged in the writ petition. That contention, needs closer examination by this Court.
2. It is better to browse through the show cause where the facts are packed and paraded.
3. The petitioner had a case that there were some skeletons in the cup board. He alleged victimisation as a main motivation for the termination of his service. The Labour Court did not note any. If it could otherwise be helped, a gruesome sight, can better be avoided. The decision in the writ petition can be had, even without an evaluation of the plea of victimisation, is my feeling.
4. The petitioner was born and brought up in the suburbs of Cochin; at Elamakkara, where Bhavan has its school. He has his middle class family with its inseparable problems. Children attending schools; parents in advanced age; moorings difficult to sever. His house was close to the place of work. The distance could be easily trekked.
5. He joined the Printing Section of Mathrubhoomi in the year 1962. His work was never found wanting. Such solid and sincere work was rendered for a long period, a decade and eight years.
6. When the Cochin establishment grew to great stature, attendant organisational activities spread among the employees. Trade Unions, many of them, were formed. The petitioner was the Treasurer of one such Union. The petitioner has a theory that the Management, on that count, generated a desire to ease him out.
7. Mathrubhoomi decided to have an additional edition from the capital of the State. A new printing establishment was thus established in Trivandrum. The new establishment required many to run it in various sections, administrative, editorial and technical. New posts could be filled up by fresh recruits. If the Management felt that some at any rate of the posts needed more experienced hands, it could either select such experienced personnel from the open market, or attempt transfer of such employees, if such transfer is otherwise permissible and/or agreeable. If the Management has bona fide taken a decision that some experienced personnel of the Cochin or Calicut office, could do the work more competently, that decision prima facie may not be unjustified. That conclusion, however, is rested on an assumption that the transfer is well within the power of the management.
8. The Management decided that the petitioner should be transferred to Trivandrum. Then came the rub. The petitioner reacted. The difficulties arising out of the transfer, and the lack of legal competence for the management to effect a transfer, were highlighted in his reply.
9. The management did not yield, Refusal to obey a lawful and reasonable order is a misconduct. It is so provided under the standing orders applicable to the establishment. Disciplinary proceedings were set in motion.
10. If the order of transfer was a lawful and reasonable one, a misconduct could be attributed to the employee. The question, however, is whether in the light of the legal principles, the transfer could be said to be either lawful or reasonable.
11. Transfer of a servant had been accepted as part of service conditions in certain given situations. Administrators, even from early times, had bestowed much thoughts on the efficiency of the reign and the safety and security for the Rulers. They had found the innovation of transfer an extremely useful one. Such was the case with the emperors of China. Such was the position with the empire builders like the English.
12. Even in recent
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.