Summary
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's review order setting aside a bus driver's dismissal. The employer had pleaded on oath before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal that the lorry driver alone was to blame, then hid that stand and the Tribunal's award from the Labour Court, which the Court found amounted to suggestio falsi and suppressio veri akin to fraud on court. As the driver admitted doing daily-wage badli work, it reduced back wages from 100% to 75%, with full terminal benefits.
Issues
- Whether the employer was guilty of suggestio falsi and suppressio veri by not disclosing to the Labour Court and the High Court its pleaded stand before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and the Tribunal's award.
- Whether the High Court was justified in exercising review jurisdiction on the basis of the Tribunal pleadings and award produced for the first time in review.
- Whether the direction for full back wages called for interference, and what relief the dismissed driver should receive.
Provisions considered
- Section 114 read with Order XLVII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Read as permitting the court in review to consider a document bearing on the decided lis that could not be produced earlier despite due diligence, the test being whether its intrinsic worth is such that the outcome could have been different. The employer's written statement before the Tribunal and the award met that test. (¶¶ 35, 36)
- Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872Addressing the view that gainful employment is within the employee's special knowledge, the Court held that the employee need only plead that he was not gainfully employed, a negative fact he cannot prove by positive evidence; once he does, the onus shifts to the employer who asserts otherwise. (¶ 44)
- Section 17-B, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947Referred to by analogy: just as an affidavit of non-employment suffices to claim full wages last drawn while an award of reinstatement is under challenge, leaving the employer to justify denial, a similar approach applies to claims for back wages. (¶ 44)
Held
- Having pleaded on solemn affirmation before the Tribunal that the lorry driver was solely negligent and the bus driver blameless, and having escaped liability on that basis, the employer made a false representation before the Labour Court by asserting the driver's rash and negligent driving (suggestio falsi), and suppressed the Tribunal's outcome (suppressio veri). This was suppression of such magnitude as to be akin to fraud on court. (¶¶ 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 31, 33)
- Although the law of evidence as such does not apply to industrial adjudication, its general principles and natural justice, including procedural fairness, do. Whether or not the Tribunal's award binds the Labour Court, a party cannot resile from its own sworn pleading, and taking contradictory stands before the two fora is impermissible approbation and reprobation. (¶¶ 27, 28, 29, 30)
- The written statement before the Tribunal and its award were of such significance as to tilt the balance in the employee's favour, so the High Court rightly entertained them and exercised review jurisdiction. (¶¶ 35, 36, 37)
- Back wages on setting aside a dismissal are not automatic; a limited fact-finding inquiry into gainful employment in the interregnum is required. Full back wages remain the normal rule, and the employer must make out an exceptional case with sufficient proof to escape it. Where gainful employment is admitted or proved, the quantum is discretionary; in suitable cases lump-sum compensation may be awarded instead of reinstatement. (¶¶ 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45)
- As the employee admitted doing daily-wage badli work but could not find permanent employment, and the exact earnings were unknown, the Court modified the award to 75% of back wages from termination to superannuation, together with full terminal benefits with interest at 6% per annum as if he had never been dismissed. (¶¶ 46, 48)
Result
Appeal disposed of; High Court's review order upheld with modification: 75% back wages from termination to superannuation plus full terminal benefits with 6% interest, payable within three months, failing which further interest at 2% applies; parties to bear their own costs.