Orissa High Court
Sibananda Mishra vs (1) Managing Director on 27 October, 2025
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra, Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.12203 OF 2020
(An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)
*****
Sibananda Mishra,
S/o-Late Kumuda Kumar Mishra,
Ex-workman of Sysnet Global Technologies Pvt. Limited,
Balipeta Street, At/P.O./P.S.- Jeypore,
Dist-Koraput, Odisha ...... Petitioner
-Versus-
(1) Managing Director,
Sysnet Global Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,
W-42, Okhala Industrial Area,
Phase-II, At/P.O.-New Delhi
(2) Presiding Officer,
Labour Court, Jeypore,
At/PO/P.S.-Jeypore,
Dist-Koraput, Odisha ....... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared:
For Petitioner : Mr. Gyanendra Chandra Swain,
Advocate
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Kamalakanta Mohanty,
Advocate
CORAM :
MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
----------------------------------------------------
Heard and disposed of on 27.10.2025
-----------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
By the Bench;
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
W.P.(C) No.12203 OF 2020
2. Petitioner-Workman being aggrieved by the award dated
29th July, 2017 (Annexure-1) passed by the learned Presiding
Officer, Labour Court, Jeypore, Koraput (for brevity, 'learned
Labour Court') in Industrial Dispute Case No.10 of 2015, has filed
this writ petition.
3. For convenience of discussion, the parties are described as
per their status before the learned Labour Court.
4. Case of the Workman as revealed from the petition under
Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity
'the Act') is that he (the Workman) was terminated from service
with effect from 21st August, 2013 without initiating any
proceeding against him or serving any notice in that regard.
Initially, the Workman approached the Conciliation Officer,
namely, the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Jeypore for redressal
of his grievances. Since the grievances of the Workman was not
redressed by the Conciliation Officer within 45 days, he filed an
application under Section 2-A(2) of the Act, praying, inter alia, for
reinstatement in service and back wages with effect from 21st
August, 2013.
4.1 It was also stated in the petition that the Workman was
appointed as a Team Leader by the Managing Director, Sysnet
Global Technologies Private Limited, New Delhi (the
Management) and he joined in service with effect from 1st April,
2010. The Workman was initially posted at SEWA BILT UNIT at
Gaganapur in the district of Koraput with instruction to perform his
duties as would be directed by the Management. Accordingly, he
reported in service and continued to perform his duty.
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
Subsequently, a written order of his appointment was issued on
20th May, 2010 (Ext.1). When the matter stood thus, the Petitioner-
Workman by virtue of an e-mail dated 16th August, 2013 (Ext.2)
was communicated that he was transferred from Avantha to
UPLCLKO with effect from 19th August, 2013 with an intimation
to report Mr. Ashwani Dutt Pathak. Again on 17th August, 2013
(Ext.3), another communication was made to him informing that
he was transferred from Bhubaneswar to UPLCLKO with effect
from 19th August, 2013 with instruction to report Mr.Ashwani Dutt
Pathak. Since details of place and address of his posting on transfer
was neither stated in Ext.2 nor in Ext.3, the Petitioner-Workman
communicated the Management to provide the detailed address of
the Office to join at the place of transfer vide letter dated 21st
August, 2013 and 22nd August, 2023. Even though such
communications were made, without responding to the same, the
Management terminated his services with effect from 21st August,
2013. The orders of transfer were also not genuine. Hence, the
Petitioner, finding no other alternative, approached the
Conciliation Officer. Since no effective conciliation was held
within the time stipulated, the Petitioner-Workman filed an
application under Section 2-A(2) of the Act for redressal of his
grievances as stated above.
5. The Management, on his appearance before the Labour
Court, filed written statement contending that the relief claimed in
the application under Section 2-A(2) of the Act is not maintainable
and prayed for dismissal of the petition. It is stated by the
Management that the job of the Workman was transferable
throughout India in the existing Offices. The Petitioner was served
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
with order of transfer under Exts.2 and 3. But he refused to join at
his place of posting taking one plea or other. The Workman had
the knowledge of his place of posting, as he communicated with
Mr. Ashwani Dutt Pathak to whom he was required to be reported.
Without joining at his place of posting, the Workman went on
communicating the Management. Since the Workman did not join
at his place of posting, he was deemed to have abandoned his
services. As such, no proceeding was required to be initiated
against him. Since the Petitioner had abandoned his services,
without joining at his place of posting, no formal order of
termination was passed dispensing with his services. Hence, the
Management prayed for dismissal of the application under Section
2-A(2) of the Act.
6. Taking note of rival pleadings of the parties, learned
Labour Court framed the following issues.
"(a) Whether the application under section 2-A(2)of
the Act filed by the Workman is maintainable?
(b) Whether the order of transfer is treated
as genuine and valid under law?
(c) Whether the retrenchment of services of
the Workman Sri Sibananda Mishra by
the Management with effect from
21.08.2013 is legal and justified?
(d) If not what relief the Workman is entitled to."
7. In support of his claim, the second party Workman
examined himself as W.W.1. He had also relied upon seven
documents, i.e., photocopy of letter of appointment dated 20th May,
2010, photocopy of transfer letter dated 16th August, 2013,
photocopy of transfer letter dated 17th August, 2013, photocopy of
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
transfer letter dated 20th August, 2011, photocopy of e-mail of the
Workman dated 21st August, 2013, photocopy of e-mail of the
Workman dated 22nd August, 2013 and copy of the complaint to
the ALC, Jeypore, which are marked as Exts.1 to 7 respectively.
7.1 Likewise, the Management examined one witness (M.W.1)
on their behalf and relied upon 11 documents, such as photocopy
of the appointment order, photocopy of transfer letter dated 16th
August, 2013, photocopy of transfer letter dated 17th August, 2013,
photocopy of e-mail dated 17th August, 2013, photocopy of e-mail
dated 21st August, 2013, photocopy of e-mail dated 22nd August,
2013 photocopy of e-mail dated 23rd August, 2013, photocopy of
e-mail dated 29th August, 2013 and photocopy of e-mail dated 3rd
September, 2013, which are marked as Ext-A to Ext. H/1
respectively.
8. Learned Labour Court on consideration of the issues held
that the application under section 2-A(2) of the Act was
maintainable. It was also held that the Workman was aware of his
place of posting and avoided to join at the place of transfer. Hence,
the application under section 2-A(2) of the Act was dismissed vide
impugned award under Annexure-1. Assailing the award under
Annexure-1, the Workman has filed this writ petition.
9. Mr. Swain, learned counsel for the Workman reiterating
the stand taken before the learned Labour Court submitted that the
Workman was never communicated with the detailed address of
his place of posting in spite of repeated communications by the
Workman. Had it been communicated, the Workman would have
been in a position to join at his place of transfer. Thus, no fault can
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
be attributed to the Workman for not joining at the place of
transfer. He further submitted that neither any domestic inquiry
was initiated nor any notice was served on the Petitioner before
termination. These material aspects were not taken into
consideration by the learned Labour Court while adjudicating the
application under section 2-A(2) of the Act. Learned Labour Court
also failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its proper
perspective. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the award under
Annexure-1.
10. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Management
submitted that e-mail of the Workman dated 21st August, 2013
(Ext.5) clearly disclosed that the Workman had communicated
with Mr. Ashwani Dutt Pathak to whom he was required to report
at Lucknow. Thus, the Workman was aware of his place of
posting. Only to avoid the joining at his place of transfer at
Lucknow, the Workman made different communications with the
Management. Since the Workman had abandoned the service by
not joining at the place of transfer, question of his termination did
not arise at all. Thus, the application under Section 2-A(2) of the
Act was not maintainable before the learned Labour Court. It was
also submitted that the learned Labour Court by reproducing the
relevant clause of appointment order and discussing the exhibits as
well as evidence available on record has arrived at a conclusion
that the Workman is not entitled to the relief of reinstatement as
claimed. Since learned Labour Court on appreciation of evidence
has arrived at a conclusion, the same is not available to be
challenged before this Court. Scrutiny of materials on record will
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
amount to re-appreciation of evidence. He, therefore, prays for
dismissal of the writ petition.
11. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the
materials/documents placed before us.
12. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent
that the Workman joined in service as Team Leader under the
Management on 1st April, 2010. When continuing as such, he was
initially served with order of transfer dated 16th August, 2013
(Ext.2). On the very next date, the Workman was served with a
rectified order of transfer dated 17th August, 2013 (Ext.3). In both
the orders of transfer dated 16th August, 2013 and 17th August,
2023 (Exts.2 and 3 respectively), the Workman was required to
report Mr. Ashwani Dutt Pathak. Upon receipt of the said letters,
the Petitioner-Workman communicated the Management on 21st
August, 2013 to provide him the detailed address of his place of
posting. Since the Workman had already communicated with the
person to whom he was required to report at Lucknow, learned
Labour Court on assessment of evidence on record came to hold
that the Petitioner-Workman had knowledge of the place where he
was required to join on transfer. But, he did not proceed to
UPLCLKO to report Mr. Ashwani Dutt Pathak. Instead of doing
that, the Petitioner-Workman went on communicating the
Management to intimate him the detailed address. The learned
Labour Court took note of the relevant clause of the appointment
order, which contained that the job of the Petitioner-Workman was
transferable throughout India. It also discussed the materials on
record. Ultimately the learned Labour Court on scrutiny of the
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
evidence on record and discussing the materials available held that
the Petitioner-Workman was aware of the place where he was
required to join vide order of transfer under Ext.3. Since the
finding of the learned Labour Court was based on materials on
record and discussing the evidence available, this Court while
exercising the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
cannot substitute its own finding by re-appreciation of evidence.
There might be a different conclusion on re-appreciation of
evidence, but the same is not permissible under law.
13. In that view of the matter, more particularly when the
impugned award has been passed discussing the evidence, both
oral and documentary on record, we are not inclined to interfere
with the same. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to interfere
with the impugned award under Annexure-1.
14. Thus, the writ petition being devoid of any merit stands
dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be
no order as to costs.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
Digitally Signed Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Signed by: HIMANSUDated 27th October,
SEKHAR DASH 2025/Himansu
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC
Date: 30-Oct-2025 17:59:25
W.P.(C) No. 12203 OF 2020
