JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The petitioner, who is a workman, challenges the
award passed by the Labour Court rejecting a reference sought
by the petitioner complaining of termination of service as
contrary to law. The petitioner's status as workman was itself
not in challenge but it was contended that he has been working
as Mali on daily wages from 10.02.2005 and worked upto
08.11.2006 but his engagement was not on any permanent
basis. The contention of the Management was that being a
daily wager his service terminated every day and began with the
following day when he was engaged. Consequently, the
termination of service did not constitute retrenchment in terms
of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the ID Act. It was also contended by the
Management that the provisions relating to appointment to a
public post had not been followed. The Labour Court accepted
the contention and, therefore, the writ petition is at the
instance of the workman.
(2.) The definition of the continuous service, which is
required to be protected under Section 25-F of the ID Act,
comes through a definition of "continuous service" contained in
Section 25-B of the ID Act. A workman who has an
uninterrupted service for a period of not less than 240 days
shall be a person who shall be treated as being in continuous
service for one year and Section 25-F states that a workman
who has been in continuous service for not less than one year
shall not be retrenched except in the procedure laid down
under the said section. All that is necessary for a workman to
show is that he had secured one year of continuous service to
be protected in the manner Section 25-F provides for. Section
25-F is invoked only when a retrenchment takes place and,
therefore, the issue is whether the termination of service
constitutes retrenchment. The excepted clauses under Section
2(oo) are spelt out in four circumstances, one of which is
provided under Clause (bb) brought through an amendment
introduced to the ID Act by Act 49 of 1984. Clause (bb) reads
as follows:
"termination of service of a workman as a
result of non-renewal of contract of
employment between the employer and the
workman concerned on its expiry or of such
contract being terminated under a stipulation
in that behalf contained therein."
The manner of engagement that comes to an end by a contract
of employment could be either through on expressed terms in
writing or it could be in oral. A person who is a Mali working
from morning to evening is not a person who must be taken as
having suffered termination every day and secure an
employment at the next day. A daily wager is not a person
whose service is at all times vulnerable at the whims of the
employer. A termination of how the Management seeks to
justify it has no acceptance in the scheme of the Industrial
jurisprudence brought through Sections 25-B and 21-F.
(3.) The award of the Labour Court is erroneous.
Termination without following Section 25-F of the ID Act was
actionable and the workman was entitled to reinstatement with
all consequential benefits and full back wages. The finding of
the Labour Court that the procedure for appointment had not
been followed could not have been countenanced in the
absence of any specific procedure that was required to be
followed by the respondent-Management through any Statutory
provision or bye laws of the educational institution that
established it. As far as I can see, it is only a private
Management college and there are no specific provisions
relating to the manner of securing engagement of labourers or
workmen. The decision of the Labour Court is erroneous on
this score as well.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.