RAJKOT IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT Vs. VIJANAND NAARAN KESUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this group of appeals, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is to the oral judgement dated 29.08.2016 passed in a group of writ petitions namely Special Civil Application No. 18627 to 18635 of 2013 whereby the petitioners therein - workmen challenged the award dated 29.06.2013 passed in Reference (LCJ) Case No. 134 of 2005 and allied references by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court at Jamnagar whereby the references came to be partly allowed in favour of the workmen and instead of reinstatement, lumpsum payment ranging upto Rs.21,000/- came to be awarded. No order was passed for conferring any other benefit.

(2.) Before the learned Single Judge, the claimants contended that after their initial appointment in 1996, they continuously worked until 1999 when their services came to be terminated in breach of Sections 25F , 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and that in each year they had worked for 240 days. During the proceedings before the Labour Court, an application was submitted that while they were in service no documents like identity card, pay slip, attendance card and other such documents were given to them and prayer was made to direct the employer to produce relevant documents namely attendance register, wage register etc. The employer failed to place on record such documents. Based on the evidence available which included categorical averments on oath by the workmen, the Labour Court believed that the action of employer - appellant herein was in breach of Sections 25F , 25G and 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and even in regard to 11 persons who were engaged after the claimants were discontinued, no specific denial came from the employer.

(3.) Before this Court, learned Assistant Government Pleader would vehemently contend that record was not available when the reference proceeded before the Labour Court but documentary evidence reveal that concerned workmen had not completed 240 days in a given year and were not entitled for the relief of even lumpsum amount. No doubt, the award passed by the Labour Court was not challenged by the employer in view of grant of lumpsum payment and no order was passed for reinstatement of the workmen, it was thought fit not to challenge such an award. However, it is submitted that the concerned authority has communicated a proposal where each of the workmen can be considered for higher amount of lumpsum payment instead of what is awarded by the Labour Court and such proposal is pending before the Department of Finance of the State Government and likelihood of receiving Rs.2,50,000/- by each of the workmen is not ruled out. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has placed reliance on the decision reported in AIR 2016 SC 4441 in case of General Secretary, Coal Washeries Workers Union, Dhanbad vs. Employers in relation to the Management of Dugda Washery of M/s. BCCL and submitted that after lapse of more than 20 years from stoppage of work of subject workmen order of reinstatement would create inequitable situation and lumpsum compensation from Rs.50,000/- in lieu of reinstatement was increased to Rs.1,50,000/- to each of the workmen. It is submitted that like wise in many other decisions, the Apex Court awarded lumpsum amount for compensation in cases of breach of provisions of labour law legislation and particularly of Sections 25G and 25H as the case may be of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. It is, accordingly, submitted that even at this stage, a fair proposal is forwarded so that no injustice can be done to the workmen and they may receive fair compensation at least to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/-. The order under challenge passed by the learned Single Judge of modifying the award of Labour Court of payment of lumpsum compensation and ordering reinstatement of workmen without backwages and treat the services of each of the workmen as notional from the date of removal/termination of service till the reinstatement deserves to be quashed and set aside.