The High Court dismissed the workman's challenge to an ex-parte award and directed the employer to pay Rs. 1,50,000 as compensation instead of reinstatement, noting that reinstatement is exceptional for those violating Section 25-F.
Directing the management to pay Rs. 1,50,000 as compensation within three months in two equal installments.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No. 33168 of 2011
W.P.(C) No. 33168 of 2011 & W.P.(C) No. 10207 of 2015
Petitioner-workman has approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 33168 of 2011 challenging the award dated 17.9.2011 passed by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in I.D. Case No. 5 of 2008. Ex-parte award was passed by the Labour Court directing the management to reinstate the workman in service with 50% back wages failing which the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 10% per annum till its realization.
The management has also filed W.P.(C) No. 10207 of 2015 challenging the order dated 19.10.2012 rejecting their application to set aside the ex-parte award which was passed in I.D. Case No.5 of 2008. Accordingly both the cases are heard together since common question is involved in both the writ petitions.
ks
Learned counsel for the management submitted that the service of the workman was terminated with effect from 1.3.2005 as per the term of engagement. The board has decided to close the mini bank because of recurring loss. It is further submitted that after ex-parte award was passed the management has filed an application to set aside the same. However without considering the reason stated therein the application was dismissed by the Labour Court. In the meantime the management has received notice in W.P.(C) No. 33168 of 2011 and they are under a bonafide impression that since the award is under challenge they can raise objection in the said writ petition. However on proper advise filed W.P.(C) No.10207 of 2015 challenging the order dismissing the application to set aside the ex-parte award.
Learned counsel appearing for the workman however
2
submitted that taking into consideration the fact that the workman was worked under the management with effect from 29.11.1994 to 1.3.2005 and his service has been terminated without complying the statutory provision the Labour Court has passed the award directing reinstatement with 50% back wages. Accordingly the award need not be interfered with.
A reference was made by the Labour and
Employment Department, Bhubaneswar under the schedule of reference as follows:-
“Whether the action of the management of Biratunga Service Co-operative Society Limited, At/Po- Biratunga, Dist-Puri in retrenching Sri Manoranjan Patra, Night Watcher from service with effect from 1.5.2005 is legal and/or justified ? If not, what relief Sri Patra is entitled to ?
Considering the rival submission of the parties and after going through the materials available on record the Labour Court held that the management before terminating the service of the workman has not complied with Section 25-F of the I.D. Act.
The settled principle in industrial dispute case, the Labour Court has to keep in view all relevant factors including the mode and manner of appointment, nature of employment, length of service, the ground on which termination/refusal of engagement held illegal i.e. violating Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before exercising its judicial discretion while passing the award and compensation in lieu of reinstatement should have been proper to a daily wager who has completed merely 240 days service.
In case of violation of the provisions of Section 25-F, order of reinstatement can be passed in exceptional cases and the normal rule is to award compensation in place of reinstatement. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. and others Vrs.
3
Lalit Kumar Verma reported in (2007)1 SCC 575, Utaranchal Forest Development Corporation Vrs. M.C.Joshi reported in (2007) 9 SCC 353, Sita Ram and others Vrs. Motilal Nehru Farmers Training Institute reported in (2008) 5 SCC 75 , Ghaziabad Development Authority and another Vrs. Ashok Kumar and other reported in (2008)4 SCC 261 and Jagbir Singh Vrs. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board and another reported in (2009) 15 SCC 327 . The aforesaid view has also been reiterated by this Court in the case of
Executive Engineer, Badanala Irrigation Division, Kenduguda Vrs. Ratnakar Sahoo and another reported in 2011(Supp.1) OLR 556 .
In view of the above settled principle, we modify the impugned award directing the management to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation to the workman within a period of three months in two equal installments.
Accordingly both the writ petitions are disposed of.
……..………….. S. Panda, J. ………………………. S.K.Sahoo, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court erred in directing reinstatement instead of compensation when Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act was violated.
Whether compensation in lieu of reinstatement is the normal rule for daily wagers who have completed less than 240 days of service.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of M.P. and others Vrs. Lalit Kumar VermaReferred¶16
(2007)1 SCC 575 · Who else cites this
Utaranchal Forest Development Corporation Vrs. M.C. JoshiReferred¶16
(2007) 9 SCC 353 · Who else cites this
Sita Ram and others Vrs. Motilal Nehru Farmers Training InstituteReferred¶16
(2008) 5 SCC 75 · Who else cites this
Ghaziabad Development Authority and another Vrs. Ashok Kumar and otherReferred¶16
(2008)4 SCC 261 · Who else cites this
Jagbir Singh Vrs. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board and anotherReferred¶16
(2009) 15 SCC 327 · Who else cites this
Executive Engineer, Badanala Irrigation Division, Kenduguda Vrs. Ratnakar Sahoo and anotherReferred¶19
2011(Supp.1) OLR 556
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manoranjan Patra
Biratunga Service Co-operative Society Limited
S. Panda
S.K. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
