Case- Thakor Shivaji Kanaji vs Water Supply And Sewerage Board (C/SCA/14211/2013)
Decided on: 3rd July 2023
CORAM: HON’BLE Justice Rajendra M. Sareen
Introduction
The petitioner challenged the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court, Mehsana, in a reference case related to terminating the petitioner’s services.
According to the facts presented in the text, the petitioner was working as a labourer for the respondent (employer) from 2001 with a monthly salary of Rs. 2000. The petitioner claimed that his services were terminated by the employer on June 30, 2003, without any notice or notice pay, which he considered a violation of specific provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The matter was referred to the Labour Court, Mehsana, and after trial, the court awarded the petitioner compensation of Rs. 10,000 in lieu of reinstatement. Both the petitioner and the employer filed separate writ petitions challenging the judgment.
Judgement
The petitioner’s submission argued that the termination was illegal and that the Labour Court should have granted reinstatement instead of compensation. In the alternative, they requested an increase in the prize awarded.
The employer’s submission claimed they did not directly employ the petitioner and were instead employed by a security service provider. They argued that the Labour Court wrongly concluded that the petitioner was working under the employer and that there was no basis for the compensation awarded.
After hearing the arguments from both sides and examining the evidence, the judge concluded that the Labour Court’s finding that the petitioner had worked for 240 days in the last year and that the termination was illegal was justified. The judge also noted that the employer failed to provide documentary evidence to prove that the petitioner was working under a contractor. Therefore, the judge upheld the Labour Court’s decision regarding the termination’s illegality.
However, the judge considered the time since the termination occurred in 2003 and found that reinstatement was not feasible. The judge referred to previous court decisions stating that reinstatement with total back wages is not automatic in cases of illegal termination and that compensation may be appropriate instead. The judge noted that the prize awarded by the Labour Court was inadequate but did not provide a specific ruling on enhancing the payment.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has over 20 years of experience in various sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aadit Shah
