Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.
The workmen represented by General Secretary - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondents
W.P.(L) No.1449 of 2010
Decided on : 26-06-2023
Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Section 20(4-A) – Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 10 – Service Law – Workmen in service – Not paying even minimum wages – Compensation – Whether dismissal of four workers Sarv Shri Somra Munda, Shri Tulsi Oraon, Tejua Oraon and Daswan Oraon of M/s Agarwal Pipe Industries Pandra, Ranchi is justified – Held, on basis of this argument, no relief can be granted to Management due to reason that this shows admission on part of Management that permission has not been accorded by authority where proceeding was pending – Court, after going through aforesaid judgments is of view that it is settled position of law that dismissal in absence of approval/permission of the Court where proceeding is pending, has not strictly been dealt with therein,, order passed by learned Labour Court, Ranchi so far as it relates to making payment of compensation to be paid by way of lumpsum compensation, is hereby, quashed and set aside – Writ petition is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
The instant writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein, the part of the award, by which, instead of reinstating the workmen in service with the consequential benefits, the compensation to the tune of Rs.12,000/-was awarded to the workmen, has been assailed.
2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, are required to be enumerated reads as under:-
It is the case of the writ petitioner that on 14.12.2002, the Govt. of Jharkhand, Dept. of Labour & Employment by its notification no.3063 referred the following disputes for adjudication:-
This reference was sent to the Labour Court, Ranchi where it was registered as Reference No.2 of 2003. The Union and the Management both appeared, filed their respective written statements and furnished their evidences also.
It is the further case of the writ petitioner-workmen that since the Management was not paying even the minimum wages to the workmen and on behalf of them, a demand was raised which enraged the Management and took vindictive attitude. Thereafter, a case was filed before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Ranchi under M.W. Act and the concerned workmen gave their evidences against the non-payment of minimum wages by the Management, the Inspector of Factories are also directed the Management to pay the minimum wages to the workmen but the Management failed to do so. All these actions of the Union and the concerned workmen went against and the workmen were dismissed from service.
On 22.05.1996, the charge sheets were issued to these concerned workmen and they submitted their reply on 02.06.1996. The Management found the replies to be unsatisfactory and as such on 06.08.1996, the Management appointed Sri A.K. Verma, Advocate as an Enquiry Officer.
The concerned workmen objected about the appointment of an Advocate as Enquiry Officer as they were advised to have their own defence counsel but in spite of this objection, the enquiry proceeded. It was an ex-parte enquiry and enquiry officer submitted its report on 09.07.1996 and found them guilty of the charges leveled against them. The domestic enquiry has been held in violation of principles of natural justice without affording proper opportunity to the concerned workmen and as such, departmental enquiry is fit to be set aside. On the basis of this enquiry report dated 09.07.1996 of the Management dismissed these workmen on 05.02.1997. Thereafter, the Labour Court, Ranchi has passed an award dated 01.07.2008, wherein, the Management of M/s. Agarwal Pipe & Tiles industries, Ranchi has been directed to pay lumsum compensation of Rs.12,000/-to each workmen instead of reinstating the workmen in service. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid, the instant writ petition has been filed.
The facts of the case, as per the pleading made as referred hereinabove that the workmen who have been dismissed from service, against which, a reference has been made under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1947) vide notification dated 14.12.2002 for adjudication and submission of Award of reference that:
If not what relief they are entitled to”.
The learned Labour Court, Ranchi after receiving the reference has called upon the Management to put forth his defence.
The learned Labour Court, after hearing the parties has passed the award of compensating the workmen, writ petitioner by making payment of Rs.12,000/-to be made by the respondent-Management.
The learned Labour Court, Ranchi has taken into consideration the provision of sub-section 4-A of Section 20 of the Minimum W
Non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 renders the dismissal order void and inoperative, and the employer is bound to treat the employee ....
Dismissal during pendency of industrial proceedings without Section 33(2)(b) approval renders it inoperative; workman deemed continuing in service with automatic reinstatement and adjusted back wages....
The court affirmed that dismissal without approval under Section 33(2)(b) is inoperative, and the employee is deemed to continue in service until approval is granted.
Failure to seek approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act renders dismissal void and inoperative, as established by the Supreme Court in Jaipur Zila case.
Failure to seek approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act renders dismissal orders void ab initio, overriding subsequent interpretations from Smaller Benches.
The requirement of simultaneous acts of dismissal, payment of wages, and filing of approval application as part of the same transaction under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act should be....
Termination of service without prior permission under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act is void if deemed punitive, entitling workmen to salary and benefits during the period of deemed servic....
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
