SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(All) 212

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R.B.Misra, J.
Regional Manager, State Bank of India
Versus
P.O., Central Government Industrial-cum-Labour Court
C.M.W.P. 13964 of 1997
Decided On : 06 February 2004
C. M. W. P. 13964 Of 1997

Advocates Appeared:
G.K.Srivastava, M.R.Gupta, ROHMA HAMEED, S.N.VARMA, YASHVANT VARMA,

Non-renewal of contractual deployment is not considered retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Headnote:

Industrial Dispute - Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 25-F, Section 25-G

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged an order terminating the services of a messenger deployed on a casual basis by the State Bank of India. The dispute revolved around the justification of the termination and the entitlement of the workman to relief.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the deployment of the respondent as a daily wager was temporary and not subject to renewal. It held that non-renewal of contractual deployment is not retrenchment and does not require observance of the provisions of Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Issues: The issues revolved around the justification of the termination of the workman's services and the applicability of Section 25-F and Section 25-G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the respondent's deployment was temporary and not subject to renewal, therefore, the provisions of Section 25-G regarding retrenchment did not apply. It also highlighted that non-renewal of contractual deployment is not considered retrenchment under the Act.

Final Decision: The court quashed the award of the Tribunal and allowed the writ petition, ruling in favor of the petitioner.

R. B. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Ms. Rohma Hameed holding brief of Sri Yashwant Verma learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. R. Gupta learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 Sri Ajai Kumar Dwivedi. In this petition order dated October 25, 1997 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal, kanpur in Industrial Dispute Case No, 4 of 1991 has been challenged.

( 2 ) WITH the consent of the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage in view of second proviso to Rule 2 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent No. 2 was deployed absolutely on casual basis for a limited period as a messenger from July 30, 1987 to March 9, 1988 by an order dated July 31, 1987 with the condition that such deployment was absolutely on temporary basis and could be ceased after the period of February 13, 1988. Such deployment was made on contractual basis for a limited period in the exigency of work and after coming to an end of the limited period the deployment on contractual basis in terms and conditions of appointment was not renewed. The petitioner had however got the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short called act hereinafter) adjudicated before the Tribunal where the dispute of following effect was referred:

"whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in terminating the services of ex-messenger Ajai Kumar Dwivedi w. e. f. March 10, 1988 is justified? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner State Bank of India (in short called bank hereinafter) the respondent No. 2 had worked only for 223 days and has not completed 240 days even as a messenger. After his deployment some other person was kept on deployment which was admitted by the petitioner himself in his letter dated August 5, 1996 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) and no person was ever subsequently deployed, therefore, there is no question of retrenchment and applying the principle of last come first go while not renewing the engagement of the petitioner.

( 5 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, learned Tribunal in the award dated October 25, 1996, had considered all the aspects while adjudicating the issues before it had noticed that one Sri Rajesh pandey subsequently deployed was not cross-examined but the petitioner being junior was retrenched. According to the petitioner when the respondent No. 2 has not even completed 240 days in a calendar year then the basic requirement of Section 25-F of act i. e. conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen is not justified, therefore, testing the case in the award in respect of non-applicability of not following the procedure of retrenchment given in Section 25-G of act cannot be tested.

( 6 ) THE relevant provisions of Section 25-F and Section 25-G of act are given as below:

"25-F. Conditions precedent to retrenchment of workmen-No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until (a) the workman has been given one months notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice; (Proviso omitted by Act No. 49 of 1984, Section 3 w. e. f. August 18, 1984 ). (b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days average pay (for every completed year of continuous service) or any part thereof in excess of six months; and (c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government (or such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette ). 25-G. Procedure for retrenchment- Where any workman in an industrial establishment, who is a citizen of India, is to be retrenched and he belongs to a particular category of workmen in that establishme





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top