Nandkishore Shravan Ahirrao vs Kosan Industries (P) Ltd.

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Civil Appeal Nos 201-202 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos 30469-30470 of 2015)

Nandkishore Shravan Ahirrao …Appellant(s)

Versus

Kosan Industries (P) Ltd …Respondent(s)

JUDGMENT

Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J

1 Leave granted.

2 The appellant was employed in the Assembly department of the

respondent. He was served with a charge-sheet on 26 June 1992. The charge

against the appellant was of causing disruption of work between 1050 am and

12 noon on 17 June 1992. Following a departmental enquiry, the appellant was

dismissed from service on 26 November 1997. In pursuance of a reference

made under the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, the Labour Court by its award Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHETAN KUMAR Date: 2020.01.17 17:19:26 IST dated 27 February 2008 came to the conclusion that the findings in the enquiry Reason: CA 201-202 /2020 2

were perverse; that the order of dismissal was harsh and granted reinstatement

in service with 25% back wages for the surplus days.

3 The order of the Labour Court was questioned before the High Court of

Gujarat by the employer. A learned Single Judge of the High Court, by a

judgment dated 5 February 2013, partly allowed the Special Civil Application.

While affirming the order of reinstatement, the Single Judge set aside the order

for payment of 25% back wages. The appellant then filed a Letters Patent

Appeal. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal on the

ground that it was not maintainable.

4 Notice was issued in these proceedings on 16 October 2015. The office

report indicates that the respondent has been served. Since the respondent

has failed to appear, we have proceeded to deal with the appeal on merits.

5 The learned Single Judge held that the Labour Court rightly observed that

the punishment which was imposed on the appellant was harsh. It appears that

even the salary of the appellant was deducted for the period in question during

which work was disrupted. However, the learned Single Judge held that the

payment of back wages would not follow as a matter of course upon an award

of reinstatement. Hence, the direction for the payment of 25% back wages was

interfered with and set aside. The Single Judge also observed that the Labour

Court has “rightly passed the judgment and award reinstating the respondent

without continuity of service”.

CA 201-202 /2020 3

6 The first grievance of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

appellant is that the High Court was in error in misconstruing the award of the

Labour Court as having denied continuity of service. We find merit in the

submission. The award of the Labour Court is in the following terms:

“The reference of second party Nandkishor Shravan Ahirrao, 94, Shriram Kutir, near Chikuvadi, Post Office – Fatehnagar, Udhna, Surat – 304220 – C/o. Bombay foods Ltd. and Kosan Industries Ltd., Worker/Employee Union, Surat is hereby partly allowed.

And the first party of this case is hereby ordered that, they have to reinstate the second party in service with 25% back-wages for his surplus days within 30 days from the publication of this order.”

7 Ex facie, the Labour Court having awarded reinstatement to the appellant,

continuity of service would follow as a matter of law. The award of the Labour

Court dated 27 February 2008 does not specifically deny continuity of service.

Hence the observation of the High Court to the effect that the Labour Court had

denied continuity of service is erroneous and would accordingly stand corrected

in terms of what has been observed herein-above. The appellant would be

entitled to continuity of service.

8 On the question of back wages, the Labour Court had confined the award

of back wages to 25%. Having come to the conclusion that the findings in the

disciplinary enquiry was perverse, the Labour Court observed that it was a CA 201-202 /2020 4

matter of record that the workman has been gainfully employed over a part of

the period after dismissal, between 3 March 1990 to 9 September 1992 with

another employer. It was in the above circumstances, that the entire component

of back wages was not awarded to the appellant and only 25% was awarded.

The High Court has no justification to set aside the award of 25% back wages

awarded by the Labour Court which was eminently fair and proper. The

direction of the High Court for deletion of back wages is therefore unsustainable

and is set aside.

9 We accordingly allow the appeals by directing that while maintaining the

award of reinstatement, the appellant would be entitled to notional continuity of

service as well as the payment of 25% back wages. Since the appellant has

retired from service during the pendency of the proceedings, his retiral dues

together with payment of 25% back wages for the relevant period shall be

computed and paid over to the appellant within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

…………...…...….......………………........J. [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud]

…..…..…....…........……………….…........J. [Hrishikesh Roy]

New Delhi;

January 10, 2020 CA 201-202 /2020 5

ITEM NO.29 COURT NO.8 SECTION III

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.30469-30470/2015

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-03-2014 in CA No. 5613/2013 24-03-2014 in LPA No. 697/2013 05-02-2013 in SCA No. 8536/2008 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad)

NANDKISHORE SHRAVAN AHIRRAO Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

KOSAN INDUSTRIES (P) LTD. Respondent(s)

Date : 10-01-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prashant Chawdhary, Adv.

Mr. Priank Adhyaru, Adv.

Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Leave granted.

The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.

(Chetan Kumar) (Saroj Kumari Gaur) A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)