Back
ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Executive Engineer (Railway - O & M), K. T. P. S. – Appellant
Versus
Bhanwar Singh – Respondent
ORDER
1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of finally, at this stage.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-employer challenging the impugned award dated 16.01.2020, passed by the Labour Court & Industrial Tribunal, Kota, under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, whereby claim of the respondent-workman has been allowed by declaring termination of his services with effect from 04.09.1995 to be illegal and bad in the eyes of law and further a lump-sum compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- along-with interest @ 9% per annum has been given in favour of the respondent-workman.
3. Learned counsel Mr.Vibhor Sharma, appears on behalf of the petitioner, made following submissions while challenging the impugned award:-
4. Learned counsel submitted that the respondent-workman challenged dis-continuance of service by filing S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.3896/1992 and this Court on 26.05.1992, passed
Termination of a workman without following mandatory provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is invalid, necessitating reinstatement.
The court held that lump sum compensation is just for workmen whose employment was wrongly terminated, balanced against the duration of service.
Compensation for termination must reflect the length of service and adhere to statutory provisions, with courts having the authority to enhance inadequate awards.
Termination of service without notice or compensation violates the Industrial Disputes Act, establishing the workman's right to reinstatement and compensation.
Compensation for unlawful termination must reflect the length of service, with the court enhancing the awarded amount to Rs.4,00,000 based on the workman's tenure.
The court ruled that an ad-hoc employee's termination does not require compliance with retrenchment provisions, and raising an industrial dispute after 16 years is impermissible due to res judicata.
Termination without notice or due process violates Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, warranting compensation.
The court established that non-compliance with statutory provisions regarding termination under the Industrial Disputes Act leads to invalid termination and entitlement to compensation.
Termination of services found in violation of Section 25-F; reinstatement not ordered due to short service and significant delay, leading to compensation instead.
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
