Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Executive Engineer, District Division North – Appellant
Versus
Jagdish Narayan Kumhar S/o Shri Ramkumar Kumhar – Respondent
Order :
1. Both these petitions have been preferred against the impugned award dated 27.03.2019 passed by the Labour Court-I, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Labour Court’) while deciding LCR No.44/2011, by which statement of claim submitted by the workman has been partly allowed and compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- has been awarded to the workman.
2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid award, both employer as well as the workman have approached this Court by way of filing these petitions.
3. The workman raised an industrial dispute by way of filing a claim petition before the Labour Court stating therein that he was engaged as daily wager in June, 1981, by the petitioner-employer and he worked on the said post till 15.12.1988, and his services were terminated without issuing any notice and without making any payment of compensation. It was the case of the workman before the Labour Court that he worked with the employer for a period of more than 240 days in a calendar year and that there has been violation of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short ‘the Act of 1947’). The aforesaid claim petition filed by the workman was opposed the petitioner and after hearing a
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.
Monetary compensation is preferred over reinstatement for daily wage workers whose termination is found illegal, especially after significant delays.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the length of service and the delay in filing the reference in determining the adequacy of compensation in cases of industrial disputes.
Monetary compensation can be awarded instead of reinstatement for daily wage workers whose termination is found illegal due to procedural defects, as reinstatement is not automatic.
Compensation for termination must reflect the length of service and adhere to statutory provisions, with courts having the authority to enhance inadequate awards.
Point of Law : When the appellants could not produce any material in their favour, either before the Labour Court or before the Learned Single Judge, they are not entitled to any compensation at all,....
The court affirmed that the burden of proof lies with the employer to disprove a workman's claim of service duration once established by affidavit.
The court held that lump sum compensation is just for workmen whose employment was wrongly terminated, balanced against the duration of service.
Compensation, rather than reinstatement, is appropriate for daily wage workers whose termination is found illegal due to procedural defects, especially when no mala fide intent is established.
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
