Summary
The Court held that irregular recruitment did not deprive these daily-wage university employees of retrenchment protection under the Industrial Disputes Act. Their qualifying continuous service and the failure to comply with Section 25F were undisputed. The earlier decision upholding de-regularisation remained final, but had left the retrenchment issue open. Considering the short period of service and circumstances, the Court substituted Rs.2,50,000 compensation for each appellant for the Tribunal’s reinstatement-related relief and 50% back wages.
Issues
- Whether irregularly recruited daily-wage workmen with qualifying continuous service were entitled to Section 25F protection.
- Whether reinstatement and back wages or monetary compensation was the appropriate relief.
Provisions considered
- Sections 2(oo), 25B and 25F, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947The admitted retrenchment of qualifying workmen required statutory notice or pay and compensation despite irregular recruitment; relief for breach depended on the circumstances. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 36, 37)
Held
- The prior judgment validating de-regularisation was final and could not be reopened in the industrial reference. It had expressly left compliance with industrial-disputes protections for determination in appropriate proceedings. (¶¶ 3, 4, 6, 7, 30, 34, 35)
- The Act’s applicability, workman status, qualifying continuous service and retrenchment outside the statutory exceptions were admitted. Recruitment without the prescribed selection procedure did not itself excuse non-compliance with Section 25F. The High Court’s contrary approach was unsustainable. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 30, 36, 37)
- Failure to comply with the mandatory retrenchment conditions rendered termination invalid, but reinstatement and back wages were not automatic. The appropriate remedy required assessment of the facts; the Court recognised the distinctions drawn in Bhurumal, including cases involving unfair labour practices or retention of juniors. (¶¶ 23, 31, 32, 33)
- The employees’ short daily-wage service from 1993 to 1997 and the surrounding circumstances justified a lump-sum award of Rs.2,50,000 each in full and final settlement instead of reinstatement with 50% back wages. This did not restore regularised status. (¶¶ 34, 42, 43, 44)
Result
Appeals partly allowed; High Court judgment set aside and Tribunal award modified to Rs.2,50,000 compensation for each appellant-workman, payable within three months in lieu of reinstatement and 50% back wages. Pending applications disposed of.