Bombay High Court
Pune Mazdoor Sabha vs Armed Force Ex Officers Multi Service Co ... on 16 April, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:17208
k 1/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3440 OF 2008
Armed Forces Ex-Officers' Multi
Services Co-operative Society Ltd.
Lokmanya Tilak Sabhagriha Bldg.
364, Gokhale Road, Pune - 15. ....Petitioner
V/S
Pune Mazdoor Sabha
54, Budhwar Peth
Laxmi Road, Pune - 411 002. ....Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.12758 OF 2024
(under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act)
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.3440 OF 2008
Pune Mazdoor Sabha
54, Budhwar Peth
Laxmi Road, Pune - 411 002. ....Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Armed Forces Ex-Officers' Multi
Services Co-operative Society Ltd.
Lokmanya Tilak Sabhagriha Bldg.
364, Gokhale Road, Pune - 15. ....Petitioner
V/S
Pune Mazdoor Sabha
54, Budhwar Peth
Laxmi Road, Pune - 411 002. ....Respondent
katkam Page No. 1 of 8
::: Uploaded on - 16/04/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 17/04/2025 22:07:00 :::
k 2/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.3940 OF 2008
Pune Mazdoor Sabha
54, Budhwar Peth
Laxmi Road, Pune - 411 002. ....Petitioner
V/S
Armed Forces Ex-Officers Multi
Services Co-operative Society
Lokmanya Tilak Sabhagriha Bldg.
364, Gokhale Road, Pune - 15. ....Respondent
_________
Mr. Anand Pai with Mr. Vipul Patel i/b M/s. Haresh Mehta &
Co. for Petitioner-Society-Employer in WP 3440 of 2008 and for
Respondent-Society-Employer in WP No.3940 of 2008 and in IA.
Mr. A.S. Rao for Respondent-Union in WP 3440 of 2008 and for
Petitioner-Union in WP 3940 of 2008 and for Applicant-Union in
IA.
__________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
RESERVED ON : 08 APRIL 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : 16 APRIL 2025.
JUDGMENT:
1. These are cross Petitions filed by the employer and the
employee challenging the Award dated 21 January 2008 passed
by Industrial Tribunal, Pune, in Reference (IT) No.28 of 2005 by
which termination of 53 members of the Union is set aside and
k 3/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
the employer is directed to reinstate the employees with
continuity of service, but without backwages. Writ Petition
No.3440 of 2008 is filed by the Employer-Society challenging the
entire Award dated 21 January 2008, whereas Writ Petition
No.3940 of 2008 is filed by the Union to the limited extent of
rejection of prayer for backwages.
2. Armed Forces Ex Officers' Multi Services Co-operative
Society (Society) is formed by Ex Officers of the Defence Forces
whose main activity is to provide various services such as
transport, gardening, security, housekeeping, etc on contract
basis in and around the city of Pune. The Society was awarded
transport contract in the year 1973 by Tata Motors Limited
under which the Society was to provide Drivers for driving of
buses owned by Tata Motors for transportation of its employees.
According to the Society, it had engaged 53 Drivers solely for
execution of the contract awarded by Tata Motors. It appears
that the Society also had similar contracts with other Companies
for which it had engaged additional Drivers. Employer
terminated the contract with Tata Motors on 10 November 2004
and terminated the services of 53 Drivers by paying them one
month salary in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation.
3. The Union representing the said 53 retrenched Drivers
raised industrial dispute challenging the terminations. Upon
failure of conciliation proceedings, Reference (IT) No.28 of 2005
k 4/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
was registered. The Reference has been answered by the
Industrial Tribunal in the affirmative by setting aside the
termination of 53 Drivers and directing the Society to reinstate
them with continuity, but without backwages. These cross
Petitions are filed challenging the Award dated 21 January 2008.
By order dated 26 June 2008, this Court admitted Writ Petition
No.3440 of 2008 and stayed the implementation of the Award
granting liberty to the Union to file individual Affidavits under
Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (ID Act) for
payment of last drawn wages. The Union has filed Writ Petition
No.3940 of 2008 challenging the Award to the extent of denial of
backwages.
4. Though this Court granted liberty to the Union to file
Applications/Affidavits for payment of last drawn wages under
Section 17-B of the ID Act, it appears that such Applications/
Affidavits were not filed immediately after admission of the
Petition. Interim Application No.12758 of 2024 is filed seeking
wages under Section 17-B of the ID Act only on 8 August 2024.
The Petitions are called out for final hearing.
5. I have heard Mr. Pai, the learned counsel appearing for the
Employer-Society and Mr. Rao, the learned counsel appearing for
the Union.
k 5/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
6. The impugned Award was passed by the Industrial
Tribunal on 21 January 2008 directing the reinstatement of 53
members of the Union. During pendency of the present Petitions,
7 members of the Union have passed away, 30 of them have
crossed the age of retirement and only 16 Drivers are yet to
attain the age of superannuation. The Labour Court did not
grant them backwages till the date of the Award. This Court
stayed the implementation of the Award by interim order dated
26 June 2008. Though liberty was granted to file Affidavit under
Section 17-B of the ID Act for payment of last drawn wages
during pendency of the Petitions, such opportunity is admittedly
not availed by the Union or any of its members. Such Application
came to be filed by the Union for the first time in August 2024.
Thus for 16 long years, the concerned workers did not think it
necessary to even apply for payment of last drawn wages during
pendency of the Petitions.
7. Thus, the position that prevails as of now is that
backwages were denied to the 53 Drivers by the Industrial
Tribunal and after admission of the Petition, they did not apply
for payment of last drawn wages. Out of the 53 Drivers, 37 are
not available for reinstatement on account of retirement and
death. Only 16 Drivers are available for reinstatement as of now.
Mr. Pai has however shown willingness to reinstate the 16
remaining Drivers. However they are also at their advanced ages
and it is highly doubtful as to whether they would be in a
k 6/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
position to drive buses at such advanced ages. Considering this
situation, in my view, reinstatement of even those 16 Drivers at
this point of time would not be advisable.
8. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the
present case, in my view, ends of justice would meet if lumpsum
compensation is awarded to the members of the Union/their
heirs instead of reinstatement and/or backwages.
9. The next issue for consideration is the quantum of
lumpsum compensation payable to the members of the Union.
The Society is formed by the Ex-officers of Armed Forces. It is a
Co-operative Society looking after essentially the welfare of the
ex-defence personnel. It is not a profit making organization. The
Society otherwise followed the norms of retrenchment by paying
one month notice pay and retrenchment compensation to each of
the 53 Drivers. Depending on the services put in by each one of
them have received varied amounts towards retrenchment
compensation and notice pay. Those who were, in longer services
have received payments in the range of Rs.37,000/- to Rs.41,000/-
whereas those with lesser years of services and who were
engaged in the year 2003/2004 have received lesser amounts
towards notice pay and retrenchment compensation. Their
retrenchment is found to be illegal essentially on account of non-
following of seniority list while retrenching their services.
Considering these facts, in my mind, it would be appropriate
k 7/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
that lumpsum compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- is paid to each
member of the Union towards full and final settlement. In
respect of those members of the Union who have passed away,
the compensation needs to be paid to their legal heirs.
10. Since the members of the Union are not held entitled for
reinstatement and are instead being awarded lumpsum
compensation, the prayer of the Union for payment of backwages
in Writ Petition No.3940 of 2008 deserves to be rejected.
11. I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:
i) Award dated 21 January 2008 passed by Industrial
Tribunal, Pune in Reference (IT) No.28 of 2005 is modified to the
extent that the members of the Union shall be entitled to
payment of lumpsum compensation in lieu of reinstatement and
backwages.
ii) Each of the 53 members of the Union are held entitled to
payment of lumpsum compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- towards full
and final settlement of all their claims.
iii) The employer-Society shall pay to each member of the
Union lumpsum compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- within a period of
eight weeks by handing over cheques drawn in the name of each
k 8/8 5 wp 3440.08 + 1 J as.doc
individual member which shall be collected by the Union for
being handed over to each of its members.
iv) In respect of those members of the Union, who have passed
away, the Union shall communicate the employer-Society the
names of their legal heirs within a period of four weeks in whose
name cheque for compensation shall be drawn.
v) Beyond the lumpsum compensation so awarded, the
members of the Union shall not be entitled to any further service
related benefits from the employer-Society.
12. With the above directions, Writ Petition No.3440 of 2008 is
partly allowed and Writ Petition No.3940 of 2008 is
dismissed. Rule is made partly absolute in Writ Petition
No.3440 of 2008 and Rule is discharged in Writ Petition No.3940
of 2008. There shall be no order as to costs.
13. In view of disposal of both the Writ Petitions, nothing
would survive in Interim Application No.12758 of 2024 and the
same also accordingly disposed of.
(SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)
SUDARSHAN by SUDARSHAN
RAJALINGAM
RAJALINGAM KATKAM
KATKAM Date: 2025.04.16
14:58:03 +0530
