EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ZP ENGG. DIVN. AND ANR. versus DIGAMBARA RAO

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 716 · Decided: 27-09-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N. SANTOSH HEGDE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ZP ENGG. DIVN. AND ANR. 
v. 
DIGAMBARA RAO 
SEPTEMBER 27, 2004 
[N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND S.B. SINHA, JJ.] 
Labour Laws : 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 
Res judicata-Principles-Applicability of-To an industrial 
adjudication-Workmen filed a writ petition before the High Court claiming 
for regularization of their services and also for a direction not to discontinue 
their services, which was dismissed- Subsequently, the workmen filed an 
application before the Labour Court challenging their termination-
Maintainability of-Held: It is well settled that the general principle of res 
judicata ·applies to an industrial adjudication-The prayer in the writ 
application had a direct nexus with the orders of termination of services of 
the said workmen-The workmen while filing the writ a.np/ication were bound 
to lay their whole claim having regard to 0. 2 R. 2 CPC or principles 
analogous thereto-The workmen were, therefore, obliged to question their 
orders of termination in the writ petition-They did not do so-Hence, 
proceedings initiated before the Labour Court challenging their termination 
orders were barred under the principle of res judicata-Code of Civil 
Procedure, I 908, 0. 2 R. 2. 
Section 2(oo)(bb)-Employment of workmen-Burden of proof-Held: 
Lay on the employer. 
Section 25-F-Retrenchment-Regularization of services-Services of 
workmen terminated on completion of Scheme-However, Labour Court 
directed reinstatement of the said workmen having worked for more than 2 40 
days, the provisions of S. 25-F were required to be complied with-
Correctness of-Held: Mere completion of 240 days of continuous service 
in a year may not by itself be a ground for directing an order of regularization-
It was also not the case of the workmen that they were appointed in 
accordance with the extant rules-Therefore, no direction/or regularization 
of their services could be issued 
716 
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ZP ENGG. DIVN. v. D. RAO 
717 
Sympathy or sentiment-Whether a ground for passing an order in 
A 
favour of a petitioner-Held: Cannot be a ground especially when the 
petitioner had miserably failed to establish his legal right-While being 
sympathetic to persons who come before a court, the courts cannot at the 
same time be unsympathetic to the large number of eligible persons waiting 
for a long time in a long queue seeking employment. 
B 
The respondents-workmen were employed on daily wages in relation 
to a Scheme. Their services were terminated on completion of the Scheme. 
The respondents filed a writ petition before the High Court claiming 
regularization of their services and for a direction not to discontinue 
their services and also for payment of arrears of salary from the date 
C 
of completion of 240 days of continuous service. A Single Judge of the 
High Court found that the services of the respondents had, in fact, been 
discontinued and, therefore, dismissed the writ petition. The Division 
Bench dismissed the writ appeal. 
D 
Subsequently, the respondents filed applications before the Labour 
Court challenging the orders of their termination. The Labour Court set 
aside the termination orders, on the ground that the respondents having 
worked for more than 240 days, the provisions of Section 25-F of the 
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were required to be complied with. The 
High Court dismis~ed the writ petition tiled by the appellant-employer. 
E 
Hence the appeal. 
r 
On behalf of the respondents,' it was contended that the principle 
of res judicata had no application in the instant case inasmuch as in the 
writ petitions the prayer made by the respondents was for regularization 
of their services, whereas before the Labour Court the legality or 
otherwise of the orders of termination came to be questioned and that 
as the respondents have already crossed the age of forty, this Court 
should take a sympathetic view and might not interfere with the impugned 
judgments. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. Although the principal plea of the respondents in the 
writ petition was for regularization of their services but they had a\so 
prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus or for a direction not to 
F 
G 
H 
718 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A 
discontinue their services as also payment of arrears of salary, difference 
or arrears of salary from the date of completion of 240 days and to 
grant all service benefits as applicable to regular employee

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.