Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN
Ram Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court – Respondent
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. - The present appeals bearing LPA-540 & 1770-2018 arise out of common judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in CWP-23090-2012 titled Ram Krishan v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hissar decided on 16.01.2018.
2. The learned Single Judge modified the award of the Labour Court dated 27.08.2010 whereby compensation of only Rs.45,000/- had been given and granted compensation to the tune of Rs.3,50,000/- which would be payable within a period of 4 months. The conditional interest @ 6% per annum from the date of the judgment was also granted in case the compensation was not paid within prescribed period. The reasoning given by the learned Single Judge to enhance the compensation was that the appointment was from 01.03.1991 to 31.03.2003 and the demand notice was only served on 31.12.2005. It was also observed that the appointment was on daily wage basis and there was no right to hold the post. Reliance had been placed upon Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Bhurumal (2014) 7 SCC 177 to enhance the compensation while approving the dictum of the Labour Court that reinstatement was not to be granted.
3. A perusal of the paperbook would go on to show that the
Relief by way of reinstatement with backwages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a given fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescrib....
The main legal point established is that in cases of illegal termination, the court may consider exceptional circumstances and order lump sum compensation instead of reinstatement, taking into accoun....
Monetary compensation, not reinstatement, is appropriate for daily wage workers upon finding illegal terminations; reinstatement is not automatic even when procedural violations are confirmed.
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
