Executive Engineer, Public Works ... vs Sudam Mannu Ade
2016 Latest Caselaw 3100 Bom

                                                                                                        1                                                  wp2257.08

                                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                     NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                                                                                                                             
                                                              WRIT PETITION NO.2257/2008




                                                                                                                                  
    1.         Executive Engineer, 
               Public Works Division, 
               Pusad, Distt. Yavatmal. 




                                                                                                                                 
    2.         Sub-Divisional Officer, 
               Public Works, Sub-Division, 
               Pusad.                                                                                                                                               ..Petitioners.

                  ..VS..




                                                                                                       
                  Sudam s/o Mannu Ade, 
                  aged about 38 Yrs., 
                  R/o Warud (Tanda) Post
                  Warud, Tq. Pusad, 
                  Distt. Yavatmal.      
                                                                     ig                                                                                                ..Respondent.
                                                                   
      - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
                  Shri K.R. Lule, A.G.P. for the petitioners. 
                  Shri R.E. Moharir, Advocate for the respondent.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
                  


                                                                     CORAM :  Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 22.6.2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard Shri K.R. Lule, A.G.P. for the petitioners and Shri R.E. Moharir,

Advocate for the respondent.

2. The petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Labour Court allowing

the complaint filed by the employee and directing the employer to engage the

employee whenever work is available with it. The employer has also challenged the

order passed by the Industrial Court dismissing the revision filed by it.

2 wp2257.08

The employee filed complaint under Section 28 read with Item 1 of Schedule

IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour

Practices Act, 1971 contending that he was engaged by the employer from 21 st

January, 1986 till 10th January, 1987 when his services were terminated illegally

without giving notice as contemplated by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.

The employee contended that the employer illegally removed him though juniors to

him were retained and work was available.

The employer opposed the claim of the employee.

After conducting the trial, the Labour Court concluded that the employee

proved that he was working with the employer from 21 st January, 1986 till 20th

January, 1987. It is recorded that the employer has not produced any evidence on

the record to counter the claim of the employee on the above point. The Labour

Court recorded that the employee was engaged for doing the work of road and the

work was complete.

The Industrial Court examined the matter independently and concurred with

the findings recorded by the Labour Court.

The petitioner - employer has not been able to point out any patent illegality or

perversity in the findings recorded by the subordinate Courts. Therefore, the

findings recorded by the subordinate Courts that the employee has worked with the

employer for one year and his services are terminated without complying with the

provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, are required to be

maintained.

This Court while issuing Rule, by the order dated 6 th June, 2008 granted stay

3 wp2257.08

to the effect, operation and execution of the orders passed by the subordinate Courts.

In my view, the directions given by the Labour Court and maintained by the Industrial

Court to the employer to continue the employee in service whenever work is

available, are required to be modified and it has to be directed that in lieu of

employment the employer shall pay compensation to the employee.

In my view, the interests of justice would be sub-served by passing the

following order:

    (i)         The impugned orders are modified. 

    (ii)
                                             

The findings recorded by the subordinate Courts that the employee has worked

with the employer for one year and his services are illegally terminated without

complying with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, are

maintained.

(iii) The employer is directed to pay compensation of Rs.60,000/- (Rs. Sixty

Thousand Only) to the employee in lieu of reinstatement/employment and other

consequential benefits.

(iv) The amount of Rs.60,000/- (Rs. Sixty Thousand Only) shall be paid by the

employer to the employee till 30th September, 2016.

(v) If the amount is not paid to the employee till 30 th September, 2016, the

employer shall pay interest on the amount of Rs.60,000/- at 9% per annum from 1 st

May, 1997 i.e. immediately after the date of order passed by the Labour Court, till the

amount is paid to the employee.

(vi) The petition is disposed in the above terms.

JUDGE Tambaskar.