SABYASACHI GHOSH Vs. BATA INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admittedly the appellant worked as a salesman at the Lindsay outlet of Bata India Limited with effect from 24th January, 1997 on a daily wages of Rs. 58.85 paise. His service was terminated on 22nd February, 1998 without any notice. He raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal held in favour of the appellant and directed the employer-company to reinstate him as also to pay full back wages and other consequential benefits.

(2.) Mr. Sanyal, learned Advocate, appearing for the appellant, submitted that the mandate of section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act is reinstatement in case the retrenchment is found to have been made in violation of the mandatory requirements laid down therein. The second submission was that Court may have some discretion in the matter of awarding the back wages either in full or in part. In support of his submission he relied on the judgment in the case of General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh, 2005 106 FLR 607. He, however, submitted that as regards the relief of reinstatement there is no discretion.

(3.) The submission of Mr. Sanyal that Court may have some discretion in the matter of awarding back wages either in full or in part but has no discretion in the matter of reinstatement, is not inconformity with the views expressed by the Supreme Court in a series of matters. These were taken into consideration by the learned Trial Court and we need not reiterate that. In the case of Jagbir Singh v. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board and another, 2009 122 FLR 665. Their Lordships expressed the following opinion: