Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
S. Barman, C. J. And B. K. Patra, J.
HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. - Appellant
Versus
A. K. ROY - Respondent
Original Jurisdiction Case 280 Of 1965
Decided On : JANUARY 27, 1969
INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT - Termination of Services - Legality - Standing Orders - Applicability - Bona fide Action - Reinstatement - Compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Hindusthan Steel Limited, challenged the award of the Industrial Tribunal reinstating Sri Ajit Kumar Ray, an employee who was terminated from service. The petitioner contended that Ray's termination was justified based on adverse police reports and that the Standing Orders allowed for termination of services without assigning reasons.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner failed to produce the alleged police report against Ray and that the Standing Orders were not legally in force at the time of Ray's termination. The court also held that the petitioner's action was not bona fide as it failed to disclose the circumstances leading to Ray's termination.
Issues: 1. Whether the termination of Ray's services was legal and justified. 2. Whether the Standing Orders were applicable to Ray's case. 3. Whether the petitioner's action was bona fide. 4. Whether reinstatement or compensation was the appropriate remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the termination of Ray's services was not legal and justified as the petitioner failed to produce the alleged police report against Ray and failed to disclose the circumstances leading to his termination. 2. The court held that the Standing Orders were not applicable to Ray's case as they were not legally in force at the time of his termination. 3. The court held that the petitioner's action was not bona fide as it failed to disclose the circumstances leading to Ray's termination. 4. The court held that reinstatement was the appropriate remedy as there were no special reasons to depart from the normal rule of reinstatement.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's application and upheld the award of the Industrial Tribunal reinstating Ray.
PATRA, J.
( 1 ) IN this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner m/s. Hindusthan Steel, Limited Rourkela prays for issue of a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ or order quashing the award dated 31st August, 1965 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar by which the said Tribunal ordered the reinstatement in service of opposite party No. 1 Sri Ajit Kumar Ray with full back wages. In the year 1955, Sri Ajit Kumar Ray was admitted as a trade Apprentice for the purpose of training by Hindusthan Steel Limited and on successful completion of the three years' period of training he was by letter dated 9-10-1958, informed that having completed his training with effect from 19-9-58, he should enter into an agreement to serve the Company for a period of five years. There is nothing on record to show that Sri Ray ever executed the required bond. He was however appointed as a skilled worker (fitter) with effect from 19-958. The order of appointment may be quoted: management EX. No. 5 hindusthan STEEL LIMITED kourkela STEEL PLANT rourkela: ORISSA. OFFICE ORDER No, 4044 dated 22-9-1959. Consequent on the successful completion of training Sri A. K. Ray has been appointed in this Organisation as Skilled Worker (Fitter) on a pay of Rupees 72/- per month in the scale of 60-3-90/-with effect from 199-1958. (Forenoon ).
( 2 ) PROVIDENT fund, leave, dearness allowance and other allowance etc. , will be regulated, under rules of the Company in force from time to time.
( 3 ) HE will have to execute a bond to serve the Company for a term of 5 years.
( 4 ) THE Resident Director has powers to recover from his salary any amount that is due to the Company or Government.
( 5 ) ON satisfactory completion of three years service from the date of appointment stipulated in para 1 above he will be fixed in the scale of rs. 80-5-120/-,
( 6 ) IN any matter not covered by the above terms he will be governed by the relevant regulations and orders of the Company, If any doubt arises as to the correct interpretation of any of these terms or regulations or orders of the Company with regard to any condition of service stated above, the decision of the Company shall be final. "
2. On 9th December, 1960 he was served with an order terminating his services which may be quoted: hindusthan STEEL LIMITED rourkela STEEL PROJECT ROURKELA : ORISSA. Office order No. 3786 dated 9th December, GO. The services of Shri Ajit Kumar Ray, Fitter (Passed Out-Traineel, Blast furnace Department, Rourkela Steel Project, Rourkela, are hereby terminated forthwith. He is entitled to three months pay in lieu of notice. His name will be removed from the establishment rolls of this project from the date of his release. " 3. He was actually relieved from service on the 13th December. 1980. The rourkela Steel Mazdoor Union which took up the cause of Sri Ray raised an industrial dispute. There was a conciliation proceeding which ended in failure and in due course Government referred to the Industrial Tribunal the dispute; whether the termination of services of Sri A. K. Ray, Fitter (Passed out-trainee) Blast furnace Department of the Rourkela Steel Project, Rourkela by the Management of hindusthan Steel Limited, Rourkela, is legal and justified. If not, what relief he is entitled to. " 4. After enquiry, the Tribunal held that Shri A. K. Ray was a regular employee and that the termination of his services was not in pursuance of any contractual right but was punitive in nature. He negatived the contention of opposite party No. 1 that he was victimised by the Management for his trade union activities. But having regard to the other circumstances of the case and the punishment imposed on Sri Ray which the Tribunal considered to be illegal and unjustified he came to the conclusion that the action taken against Sri Ray amounted to victimisation and unfair labour practice and therefore passed the impugned order directing the reinstatement of
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
