Summary
A former peon, who had accepted compensation in lieu of reinstatement after his termination was held illegal, sought re-employment when existing peons were regularised. The Supreme Court held that regularisation of persons already employed was not fresh recruitment triggering Section 25H. It set aside the High Court’s re-employment direction and restored the Labour Court award rejecting the claim.
Issues
- Whether regularisation of existing staff triggered a former worker’s preferential re-employment claim under Section 25H.
- What effect the accepted compensation award had on the earlier reinstatement claim.
Provisions considered
- Section 25H, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947Preference operates when the employer proposes fresh employment to fill vacancies; regularisation of existing staff did not attract it. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23)
Held
- The accepted compensation award had finally settled the earlier reinstatement dispute. The Court also held that the case did not fall within retrenchment contemplated for the claim advanced here. (¶¶ 15, 20)
- Section 25H requires the relevant retrenched-worker status and an employer decision to fill vacancies by fresh engagement. Regularisation changes the status of a person already employed and does not itself fill a new vacancy. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23)
- The Labour Court correctly rejected the re-employment claim. The High Court orders were set aside and that award restored. (¶¶ 24, 25)
Result
Employer’s appeal allowed; High Court orders set aside and Labour Court award rejecting re-employment restored.