Summary
The Supreme Court set aside an ex parte industrial award directing an insurance company to reinstate a terminated employee, and the High Court order upholding it, because the employer company had never been impleaded before the Tribunal (only its officers were), the employee's status as a workman had not been examined, and the non-appearance was adequately explained; the dispute was remitted for fresh decision after impleadment of proper parties.
Issues
- Whether an award directing a company to reinstate an employee can stand when the claim was brought only against the company's officers and the company itself was not a party.
- Whether the ex parte award should be set aside where the employer's non-appearance was attributed to lapses of its counsel and the departure of the officers handling the matter.
- Whether the Tribunal had to examine if the employee, holding a managerial designation, was a workman before exercising jurisdiction.
Held
- Proper impleadment of parties is a sine qua non of any proceeding. A company is a legal entity distinct from its officers; an officer who signs a contract or communication as authorised signatory, or the executive head, does not thereby become personally liable for claims against the company unless a specific claim is made in that regard. An order, decree or award passed without impleading the proper party becomes inexecutable. (¶¶ 10.1, 10.2)
- The claim petition suffered from a defect because the employer company was not impleaded, yet the Tribunal directed the company to reinstate the employee. (¶¶ 10, 12)
- The Tribunal had to consider the employee's designation and job profile, and the material on record, to decide whether he was a workman, since only then would it have jurisdiction over the dispute. (¶ 12)
- The explanation for non-appearance before the Tribunal, that the two officers who had engaged counsel had left the organisation and counsel did not attend to the matter, was plausible and acceptable. (¶¶ 11, 12)
- Separately, the Court noted that the petitioner's name had been changed in the amended cause title from the original writ petitioner to the company without any order of the Court, and the change could not be accepted. (¶ 3)
Result
Appeal allowed; the High Court order and the Tribunal's ex parte award set aside; matter remitted to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits after impleadment of proper parties, with opportunity to both sides; no order as to costs.