Chief Officer vs Vinod Hira and 14

Honourable Mr. K.S. Jhaveri, J.—By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has, inter-

alia, prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and award dated 26.06.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Junagadh in I.D. Complaint No. 42 of

1999, whereby the Labour Court allowed the Complaint and directed the petitioner to reinstate the respondents-workmen with 25% back-wages.

The facts in brief are that the petitioner is a Municipal Borough and is having its own regular set up of the employees and the financial position of

the petitioner is weak. The respondents-workmen have wrongly lodged a false complaint against the petitioner before the Labour Court

apprehending their termination. They had also filed an application for interim stay which has been allowed by the Labour Court vide order dated

11.08.1999 restraining the petitioner to terminate the respondents from service. Thereafter, the respondents have filed contempt application

alleging that even though the stay order has been passed, their services have been terminated, which application has been rejected by the Labour

Court and the respondents have withdrawn the stay application.

1.1 Thereafter, the respondents workmen have filed I.D. Complaint No. 42 of 1999 before the Labour Court, which has been allowed by the

Labour Court vide order dated 26.06.2001 granting reinstatement with 25% back-wages to the respondents-workmen. Hence this petition.

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on records.

Insofar as granting of 25% back-wages by the Labour Court to the respondents-workmen is concerned, in view of the principles laid down by

the Apex Court in the case of Ram Ahsrey Singh and Another Vs. Ram Bux Singh and Others, , a workman has no automatic entitlement to back-

wages since it is discretionary and has to be dealt with in accordance with the facts and circumstances of each case. Similar principle has been laid

down by the Apex Court in the case of General Manager, Haryana Roadways Vs. Rudhan Singh, , wherein it has been held that an order for

payment of back-wages should not be passed in a mechanical manner, but a host of factors are to be taken into consideration before passing any

such order. Thus, relying upon the aforesaid decisions of the Apex Court, I am of the opinion that the respondents-workmen are not entitled to any

back-wages and therefore, the award of the Labour Court granting 25% back-wages is unjust and improper and the same is required to be

quashed and set aside.

For the foregoing reasons, the present petition is partly-allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Labour Court qua granting

of 25% back-wages to the respondents-workmen is hereby quashed and set aside. The rest of the impugned judgment and award remains

unaltered. In view of the above, the present petition is partly-allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. The award be drawn

accordingly.