The Amalgamated Plantations Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Anr.

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC010209942019

¶3

2026:GAU-AS:6768

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/6646/2019

¶6

THE AMALGAMATED PLANTATIONS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT 1,BISHOP LEFROY ROAD, KOLKATA, PIN700020, WEST BENGAL AND ITS CORPORATE HQ AT CHRISTIAN BASTI, GS ROAD, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781005, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER HUMAN RESOURCE DEPTT SRI RAJARSISH BORTHAKUR

¶7

2: THE MANAGEMENT OF TATA REFERRAL HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE CHABUA P.O- CHABUA DIST- DIBRUGARH ASSA

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT AND ANR LABOUR COURT, DIBRUGARH, ASSAM, PIN- 786001

¶10

2:NABIN BARUAH THE WORKMAN REP. BY THE ASSAM CHAH KARMACHARI SANGHA PANITOLA CIRCLE TINSUKIA DIST- TINSUKIA PIN-781625 ASSA

¶11

BEFORE

¶12

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶13

For the Petitioners(s) : Mr. M.K. Misra, Advocate

¶14

For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. A. Bhattacharya, Advocate

¶15

Page No.# 2/6

¶16

Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A

¶17

Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 14.05.2026

¶18

Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : No

¶19

Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : Yes

¶20

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶21

Heard Mr. M.K. Misra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Mrs. A. Bhattacharyya, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2.

¶22

At the outset, this Court would like to strike out the name of the respondent No. 1 from the array of parties, taking into account the well settled principle that an officer who exercises judicial powers ought not to be arrayed as a party to the writ proceedings. In fact, the Supreme Court had deprecated such a practice.

¶23

The present writ petition has been filed assailing the Award dated 20.03.2018 passed in Reference Case No. 03/2016 by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dibrugarh.

¶24

It is very pertinent to take note of that vide Notification dated

¶25

12.02.2016, the Government of Assam had referred an industrial

¶26

Page No.# 3/6

¶27

dispute for decision before the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh by formulating the following Terms of Reference, as would be seen from the Schedule to the said Notification. The Terms of Reference were as follows:

¶28

(i) Whether the Management of Tata Referral Hospital and Research Center, Chabua is justified in dismissing their workman, Sri Nabin Boruah w.e.f. 16.02.2006?

¶29

(ii) If not, whether the workman is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages or any other relief in lieu thereof?

¶30

This Court duly takes note of the impugned Award so passed. From a perusal of the said award, it is seen that the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh, narrated the facts and thereafter referred to the evidence, the arguments advanced by both sides along with the judgments rendered by various Courts. This aspect can be seen from paragraph Nos. 1 to 24 of the said Award. The decisions rendered by the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh can be seen at paragraph Nos. 25 and 26 of the said Award, which are reproduced hereinbelow:

¶31

“25) I have carefully sifted the evidence on record and considering the submission of the ld. representatives of both sides and reliance of the decisions I

¶32

Page No.# 4/6

¶33

have come to the conclusion that the dismissal of the delinquent employee Sri Nabin Boruah from his service w.e.f. 16.2.2006 is not justified. So I decide the issue No. 1 in favour of the workman Sri Nabin Boruah and against the management of Tata Referral Hospital & Research Centre, Chabua.

¶34

Keeping view of all the facts and the circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lakhs) only to the delinquent employee Sri Nabin Boruah would be a just relief in lieu of reinstatement. The compensation shall be paid to the delinquent employee Sri Nabin Boruah within 4 (four) weeks i.e. 1 (one) month from the date of publication of this Award, failing which the Management shall have to pay interests @ 6 % per annum on the said amount. Accordingly the issue No.2 is partly decided in favour of the delinquent employee Sri Nabin Boruah and partly against the Management.”

¶35

From a perusal of the above quoted paragraphs of the impugned Award dated 20.03.2018, it would be seen that the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh did not assign any reasons in respect to the Terms of Reference. It is the opinion of this Court that the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh was under a statutory obligation as mandated by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to decide the reference made vide Notification dated 12.02.2016 by assigning reasons.

¶36

It is well settled that when any judicial order or award is passed by a statutory authority, it is the requirement of law that the same must be accompanied by reasons. The impugned Award

¶37

Page No.# 5/6

¶38

as stated above, is bereft of reasons.

¶39

Considering the above, this Court therefore sets aside the Award dated 20.03.2018 passed by the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh. It is also the opinion of this Court that the reference made by the appropriate Government is also required to be answered by the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh.

¶40

Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions:

¶41

(i) The impugned Award dated 20.03.2018 is set aside and quashed.

¶42

(ii) The learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh is directed to decide the Reference Case No. 03/2016 on the basis of the Terms of Reference notified in the Schedule to the Notification dated 12.02.2016 by assigning due reasons.

¶43

(iii) This Court also takes note of that the workman in question was dismissed on 16.02.2006 and in the meantime, two decades has passed by. Under such circumstances, this Court directs the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh to decide the said reference upon the appearance of the parties, as

¶44

Page No.# 6/6

¶45

expeditiously as possible, taking into account that there would be no further necessity for adducing evidence except for hearing the arguments of the respective parties.

¶46

(iv) Taking into account that the parties are duly represented, this Court directs the parties to appear before the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh on 24.06.2026.

¶47

(v) The Registry is forthwith directed to send back the records to the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh, ensuring that the said records are made available before the learned Labour Court on the next date fixed by this Court hereinabove. If necessary, the Registry of this Court shall employ the services of a special messenger.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

Digitally signed by Satyam Satyam Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.05.18 12:04:23 +05'30' Comparing Assistant

The Amalgamated Plantations Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Amalgamated Plantations Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Management of Mahakali Tea Estate Vs the State of Assam

M/S Satish Prasad and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

All Assam Fair Price Shop Dealers Association and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Pradip Chutia and Anr. Vs the Gauhati High Court and 2 Ors.

M/S Trishul Traders and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sri Pratik Maskara Vs Oil and Natural Gas Corporation