Batch of five workmen's writ appeals (WA Nos. 355, 317, 378, 390 and 392 of 2014; WA 355/2014 the lead case) against learned Single Judge orders that, while partly allowing the State-employer's writ petitions, substituted the reinstatement granted by the Labour Court/Industrial Court with Rs. 1,00,000/- compensation per workman. The labour fora had found the daily-wagers — orally terminated in 1994-95 (one in January 2000) — to have completed over 240 days in the preceding twelve months and to have been retrenched without compliance with Section 25 (F) of the Industrial Disputes Act; a State Circular dated 05.03.2008 had promised regularization of daily-wagers engaged prior to 1988/1997. Earlier, a Division Bench (order dated 22.12.2016) referred questions to a Full Bench, which on 29.08.2025 answered the reference and tabulated the factors governing reinstatement versus compensation (nature of employment, length of service, delay, feasibility, conduct, equity), observing that no straitjacket formula can be laid down. Applying those factors, and noting that the appellants had served from 12 to 30 years, were continuing on their posts under interim orders, and had not been removed for any misconduct or indiscipline — a fact uncontroverted by the Additional Advocate General — the Court held reinstatement, not token monetary compensation, to be the proper course; it set aside all five Single Judge orders, dismissed the State's writ petitions, and allowed WA Nos. 355/2014, 317/2014, 378/2014 and 390/2014. In WA No. 392/2014 the original workman (Tokram Rajwade) died during the appeal, leaving his widow Smt. Geeta Bai Rajwade as appellant, and the dispute had been raised after a delay of about fifteen years. The Court held that although the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 prescribes no limitation for raising a dispute or for a Section 10 reference, the equitable doctrine of delay and laches applies, but no employer-prejudice was shown here; reinstatement of a deceased workman being impossible, compensation of Rs. 5 Lacs was awarded to the widow, payable within three weeks — WA 392/2014 partly allowed. Precedents urged by counsel (Jeetubha Khansangji Jadeja v. Kutchh District Panchayat, Civil Appeal No. 6890/2022; Chamra Das v. Municipal Corporation, Korba, WA No. 399/2022) were noted without express engagement by the Court.
