G. T. LAD & ORS versus CHEMICALS & FIBRES OF INDIA LTD.

Citation: [1979] 2 S.C.R. 613 · Decided: 06-12-1978 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.R. KRISHNA IYER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

_, 
613 
G. T. LAD & ORS 
v. 
CHEMICALS & FIBRES OF INDIA LTD. 
December 6, 1978 
[Y. K. KRISHNA [YER, JASWANT SINGH AND A. D. KOSHAL, JJ.] 
lndifstrial Disputes Act, 1947-fVorknicn went on peaceful strike-Did not 
Join d1.'lY to response to cornpany's notices-ff an1ounts to abandonment of 
duty--fVord.5 & Phrases-Abandonnicnt-Meaning of. 
In ~:upport of their demand for reinstatement of certain dismissed union 
leaders a number of workmen, including the appellants had gone on an inde-
finite peaceful strike. The Company (respondent) put up a notice that the strike 
was illegal and that the striking workmen were liable to disciplinary action for 
misconduct. A week later, the company issued individual notices to the appel-
lants and other workmen calling upon them to report for duty, failing which 
their ab:;ence would be construed as voluntary abandonment of service and that 
their naines would be struck off the muster rolls. A few days later the company 
informed the workmen concerned that by not reporting for duty they had con-
firmed its presumption that they were no longer interested to continue in its 
service that they had totally abandoned its service. The names of the appellants 
had been struck off the rolls. 
In final settlement of the workers' claims for 
gratuity, leave salary and a month's salary a cheque was sent to each of the 
appellants. But the appellants returned the cheques to the company pointing 
out that they were interested in the service of the company and that they had 
neither voluntarily abandoned the service nor did they ·wish to do so and that 
they wot1ld report for work as soon as the strike was called off. 
Thereafter, 
although there were prolonged negotiations between the union and the company, 
the com:i::any did not take them into its service. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
Since a dispute was pending before an Industrial Tribunal application was 
made under s. 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Tribunal rejected 
the work,~rs' demand for reinstatement. 
F 
In appeal to this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellants that (i) 
removing their names from the rolls was illegal and arbitrary; (ii) the appellants 
had not voluntarily abandoned the company's service and (iii) since termina-
tion of service could only be in accordance with standing orders, and since the 
standing crders in this case did not provide for treating the workmen as having 
abandoned the service in case they were absent in connection with a strike, the 
G 
company's action in terminating the appellants' services was illegal. 
Allowing the appeal, 
HELD : The impugned action of the company and the award of the Tribunal 
~ere illeg•l. [619 El 
1. To tonstitute abandonment there must be total or complete giving up of 
H 
duties so < s to indicate an intention not to resume the same. Failure to per-
form dutic; pertaining to an office must be with actual or imputed intention on 
614 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1979) 2 S.C.R. 
A 
the part of the officer to abandon and relinquish the office. The intention may 
be inferred from the acts and conduct of a party and is a question of fact which 
could be determined 
in the light of surrounding circumstances in each case. 
Temporary absence is not ordinarily sufficient to constitute abandonment of 
office, [617 D-F] 
Buckingham Co. v. Venkatiah & Ors., [1964] 4 SCR 265; referred to. 
B 
2. The absence of workmen from duty was purely temporary and cannot be 
construed as their voluntary abandonment of the company's service. There was 
nothing in the surrounding circumstances or the conduct of the work.men indicat-
ing or suggesting an intention on their part to abandon service. 
To abandon 
service means to detach, unfasten, undo or untie the binding knot or link which 
holds one to the office and obligations and privileges that go with it. [618 C·E] 
C 
In the instant case the workmen went on a peaceful strike. By their letters 
they unequivocally intimated to the company that they did not intend to aban-
don service. They had returned the cheques sent to them by the company. 
Union of India v. Gopal Chandra Misra 
[1978] 2 SCC 301-[1978] 3 SCR 
12 referred to. 
D 
3. Since there was no provision in the certified standing orders, by virtue of 
v.·hich the company could have terminated the services of the workmen, the 
impugned action amounted to change in the conditions of service of the work-
men during the pendency of the industrial' dispute which adversely affected th

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