B.S.N.L vs Pawan Kumar Shukla
- SCC(2016) 14 SCC 665
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a workman has been engaged on a daily-wage basis for a project-based or temporary engagement and the project is concluded, the court may in its discretion award lumpsum compensation in full and final settlement of all claims arising from such engagement, taking into account the nature of the work and the completion of the project, rather than enforce full regularization or other remedies that would have been available to a permanent employee. Where a workman has been continuously engaged for an extended period (such as thirteen years) in a substantive role (such as that of a driver), the court will decline to interfere with the employment relationship on appeal, treating such long-term engagement as creating rights that warrant deference to the original forum's determination.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
PAWAN KUMAR SHUKLA Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5447 OF 2016 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 13965 OF 2013]
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Having regard to the nature of work, for which the respondents- workmen were engaged and having regard to the submission that the project is already over, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met if a lumpsum compensation is awarded to the workmen.
3. Therefore, in full and final settlement of all the claims available to the respondents-workmen in respect of their daily waged engagement under the appellant, the respondents-workmen shall be paid compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs) each.
4. We make it clear that in case, the appellant-BSNL engages any fresh daily wagers, the respondents-workmen shall be given preference.
5. The compensation shall be paid within six weeks from today.
6. With the above observations and directions, the appeals are disposed of.
No costs.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]
New Delhi;
July 01, 2016.
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5448 OF 2016 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 35884 OF 2013]
B.S.N.L. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
MOHD. JAMEY & ANR. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. We are informed that the respondent-workman has been working in the appellant-establishment for the last 13 years. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction, particularly in view of the fact that the respondent-workman is engaged as a Driver.
3. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
No costs.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]
New Delhi;
July 01, 2016.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free