Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J
Employer in relation to Management of Food Corporation of India, through its Area Manager – Appellant
Versus
Upendra Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the award dated 03.07.2012 (published in the gazette on 19.07.2012) passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 at Dhanbad in Reference Case No.21 of 1998 and 31 of 1998 whereby the petitioner has been directed to reinstate the respondents (hereinafter referred to as respondent workmen) with 75% back wages payable from the date of making reference, that is, 11.06.1998. A further direction has been issued to regularize them as watchmen in category-IV post with all consequential benefits within two months from the date of publication of the award. The terms of reference in Reference Case No. 21 of 1998 and in Reference Case No. 31 of 1998 which were decided by the common impugned award dated 03.07.2012 is quoted as under:
Terms of Reference in Reference Case No. 21 of 1998
"Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India, Patna in retrenching S/Sri Upendra Kumar and Ramesh Kumar w.e.f. 1.8.86 in contravention of Sec. 25-F of the I.D. Act, 1947 and denying reinstatement with full back wages and regularisation of service as per H.Q. Circular dat
Entitlement to back wages is standard upon wrongful termination, subject to proof of unemployment; management's failure to regularize violated its own policies.
Regularization of services – Having allowed workmen to put in regular service to its own benefit for over two decades, management can no longer claim an indefeasible right to continue with and canvas....
There may be cases where termination of a daily-wage worker is found to be illegal on the ground that it was resorted to as unfair labour practice or in violation of the principle of last come first ....
there is a breach of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act and as there is a delay of 11 years in preferring the reference, instead of granting reinstatement a lump sum amount as full and final settlement wil....
However, wherever it is found that similarly situated workmen are regularized by the employer itself under some scheme or otherwise and the workmen in question who have approached Industrial/Labour C....
Once violation of Sections 25(F), (G) and (H) of the Industrial Disputes Act is established, reinstatement should follow, as per the decision in Gauri Shanker vs. State of Rajasthan.
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
