9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 853X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the employer from 1.3.86 to 11.6.87, when his services were terminated. The respondent raised an industrial dispute, which was referred by the State Government for adjudication before the Labour Court. The employer as well as the employee filed their written statements. Oral evidence was also presented on behalf of the respondent as well as the employer. 3. It was submitted on behalf of the respondent that he was being paid a sum of Rs.1200/- per month as wages. He worked till 10th of June 1987. He was not permitted to work from 11th June 1987 onwards. On behalf of the employer it was stated that respondent was employed only as a part time accountant. Therefore, the reference was not competent. 4. Upon due appreciation of the evidence led by the parties, the Labour Court concluded that the respondent was working in the organization of the appellant on a salary of Rs.1,200/- per month as full time Accountant. It further held that respondent was removed from service without any notice or retrenchment compensation, which is clearly improper and illegal. Therefore, the respondent was entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 12.6.87. With regard to back wages, the Labour Court observed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ack wages to the respondent. The respondent had failed to give any evidence before the Labour Court, that he remained unemployed from the date his services were terminated. He was unable to explain as to how in the absence of gainful employment, he had maintained himself for the long gap of 15 years. Taking into consideration the entire fact situation and on due appreciation of the evidence the Labour Court had correctly declined to award any back wages. The aforesaid finding has been reversed by the High Court without any legal justification. Learned counsel also submitted that the entitlement to back wages is not automatic. In fact in the writ petition, the respondent had only prayed for amendment of the award with respect to two aspects. It was prayed that the respondent ought to be paid wages as per the Minimum Wages Act and the period spent before the Conciliation Board be added to the award for the purposes of granting monetary benefits. According to the learned counsel the High Court has granted the relief of full back wages without there being any factual basis for the same. 11. Learned counsel has relied on a number of judgments of this Court in support of the proposition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lieu of the discharge or dismissal, as the circumstances of the case may require. The section is couched in wide and comprehensive terms. It vests a wide discretion in the Tribunal in the matter of awarding proper punishment and also in the matter of the terms and conditions on which reinstatement of the workman should be ordered. It necessarily follows that the Tribunal is duty-bound to consider whether in the circumstances of the case, back wages have to be awarded and if so, to what extent. From the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal which has been confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court, it is clear that the order for payment of full back wages to the workman was passed without any discussion and without stating any reason. It appears that the Tribunal and the Division Bench had proceeded on the footing that since the order of dismissal passed by the management was set aside, the order of reinstatement with full back wages was to follow as a matter of course. In Hindustan Tin Works (P) Ltd. v. Employees a three-Judge Bench of this Court laid down: (SCC p. 86, para 11) "11. In the very nature of things there cannot be a straitjacket formula for awarding relief o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rought about by the subsequent decisions of this court, probably having regard to the changes in the policy decisions of the Government in the wake of prevailing market economy, globalization, privatization and outsourcing, is evident." 17. From the above observations it becomes apparent that payment of full back wages upon an order of termination being declared illegal cannot be granted mechanically. It does not automatically follow that reinstatement must be accompanied by payment of full back wages even for the period when the workman remained out of service and contributed little or nothing to the industry. 18. Again in the case of Haryana State Electricity Development Corporation Ltd. vs. Mamni (2006) 9 SCC 434 this court reiterated the principle. The principles laid down in UP State Brassware Corp. Ltd. (supra). 19. Recently this Court again examined the issues with regard to payment of full back wages in the case of P.V.K. Distillery Ltd. vs. Mahendra Ram (2009) 5 SCC 705. 20. After examining the relevant case law it has been held as follows: "Although direction to pay full back wages on a declaration that the order of termination was invalid used to be the usual result ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and placing reliance on the judgment in M/s. Hindustan Tin Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Employees of M/s. Hindustan Tin Works Pvt. Ltd. and ors. held that the normal rule of full back wages ought to be followed in this case. We are of the considered opinion that such a conclusion could have been reached by the High Court only after recording cogent reasons in support thereof. Especially since the award of the Labour Court was being modified. The Labour Court exercising its discretionary jurisdiction concluded that it was not a fit case for the grant of back wages. In the case of P.V.K. Distillery Ltd. (supra), it is observed as follows: "The issue as raised in the matter of back wages has been dealt with by the Labour Court in the manner as above having regard to the facts and circumstances of the matter in the issue, upon exercise of its discretion and obviously in a manner which cannot but be judicious in nature. There exists an obligation on the part of the High court to record in the judgment, the reasoning before however denouncing a judgment of an inferior tribunal, in the absence of which, the judgment in our view cannot stand the scrutiny of otherwise being reasonable." 22. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
