Reinstatement is not automatic for procedural violations under the Industrial Disputes Act; monetary compensation may be granted instead.

ORDER :

(Inderjeet Singh, J.)

Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners (hereinafter to be referred as "Department") challenging the award dated 19.06.2000 passed by the learned Labour Court, Bharatpur.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1- Workman raised an industrial dispute and after failure of the conciliation proceedings, the State Government made a reference to the learned Labour Court, Bharatpur for adjudication of the dispute. Thereafter, the Workman submitted a claim stating therein that he was appointed by the Department in the year 1989 and he has worked therein till 1992. Thereafter, the Department terminated his services without assigning any reason. The Department filed a reply to the claim petition and submitted therein that the Workman has never completed 240 days in one calendar year and he had left the job as per wish without informing the Department. Thereafter, the Workman as well as the Department submitted the oral and documentary evidence. The learned Labour Court after considering the evidence adduced by the parties comes to a finding that there is no violation of under Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred as "ID Act"). However, the learned Labour Court has recorded a finding that there is a violation of 25 H of the ID Act, as while giving appointment to the new persons, the Workman was not given an opportunity for re-employment. The learned Labour Court vide its award dated 19.06.2000 ordered for reinstatement of the Workman with continuity of service and also awarded 25% of the back-wages. Being aggrieved by the award dated 19.06.2000 the Department has preferred the present writ petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioners submits that since the learned Labour Court has recorded a finding that there is no violation of 25 F of the ID Act, therefore, the learned Labour Court has committed a serious illegality in directing for reinstatement of the Workman. Counsel further submits that the reinstatement in such cases is not automatic and some reasonable compensation can be given to the Workman.

4. In support of his contention, counsel relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of BSNL v. Man Singh reported in (2012) 1 SCC 558, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that when the termination is set aside because of violation of the provisions of 25F of the I.D Act, it is not necessary that the relief of reinstatement be given as a matter of right.

5. Counsel further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of BSNL v. Bhurumal, reported in (2014) 7 SCC 177, taking the trend further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court inter alia held as under in para 33 and 34:-

"33. It is clear from the reading of the aforesaid judgments that the ordinary principle of grant of reinstatement with full back wages, when the termination is found to be illegal is not applied mechanically in all cases. While that may be a position where services of a regular/permanent workman are terminated illegally and/or malafide and/or by way of victimization, unfair labour ractice etc. However, when it comes to the case of termination of a daily wage worker and where the termination is found illegal because of procedural defect, namely in violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, this Court is consistent in taking the view in such cases reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and instead the workman should be given monetary compensation which will meet the ends of justice. Rationale for shifting in this direction is obvious.

34. Reasons for denying the relief of reinstatement in such cases are obvious. It is trite law that when the termination is found to be illegal because of nonpayment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, even after reinstatement, it is always open to the management to terminate the services of that employe