MAHBOOB DEEPAK versus NAGAR PANCHAYAT GAJRAULA & ANR.

Citation: [2007] 13 S.C.R. 672 · Decided: 13-12-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
MAHBOOB DEEPAK 
v. 
NA GAR PAN CHA YAT GAJRAULA & ANR. 
DECEMBER 13, 2007 
B 
(S.B. SINHA AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.) 
Labour Law: 
c 
Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 
s. 6-N-Daily wager-Termination of services for financial 
irregularities-HELD: Labour Court erred in directing reinstatement 
-High Court while setting aside the award erred in not considering 
the effect of non-compliance of s. 6-N-Workman was entitled to 
D compensation notice and notice pay-Since workman had worked for 
a short period, judgment of High Court modified by directing payment 
by way of damages. 
Services of the appellant, a daily wager, were terminated for 
E financial irregularities said to have been committed by him. He 
raised an industrial dispute claiming that his services were to be 
regularized after three months of his joining the service. The Labour 
Court directed his reinstatement with full back wages. But, the High 
Court upheld the order of the Department. Aggrieved, the workman 
F filed the instant appeal. 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: I.I. .Having regard to the fact that the workman had 
completed 240 days of work during a period of 12 months preceding 
G the date of termination of his service, provisions of Section 6-N of 
the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 were required to 
be complied with. An order of retrenchment passed in violation of 
the said provision although can be set aside but as has been noticed 
t 
by this Court in a large number of decisions, an award of 
H 
672 
MAHBOOBDEEPAKv. NAGARPANCHAYATGAJRAULA 673 
[S.B. SINHA, J.] 
reinstatement should not, however, be automatically passed. The A 
factors which are relevant for determining the same, inter alia, arc: 
(i) whether in making the appointment, the statutory rules, if any, 
had been complied with; (ii) period the workman had worked; (iii) 
whether there existed any vacancy; and (iv) whether the workman 
obtained some other employment between the date of termination B 
and passing of the award. [Para 6 and 7) [675-D-G) 
1.2. Applying the legal principles, the relief granted in favour 
of the appellant by the Labour Court is wholly unsustainable. The 
same also appears to be somewhat unintelligible. The High Court, 
on the other hand, did not consider the effect of non-compliance of C 
the provisions of Section 6-N of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial 
·. Disputes Act, 1947. The appellant was entitled to compensation 
-
notice and notice pay. It is now well settled by a catena of decisions 
ofthis Court that in a situation of this nature instead ~nd in place of 
directing reinstatement with full back wages, the workmen should D 
be granted adequate monetary compensation. 
[Para 10 and 12] [676-C-E] 
Madhya Pradesh Administration v. Tribhuban, (2007) 5 SCALE 
397, relied on. 
1.3. As the appellant had worked only for a short period, the 
interest of justice will be sub-served if the High Court judgment is 
modified by directing payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/- by way of 
damages to the appellant by the respondent. [Para 13] [676-F] 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5875 of F 
2007. 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 3.9.2004 of the High 
Court of Allahabad in Civil Misc. W.P. No. 35935 of2004. 
Suresh Kumari and Debasis Misra for the Appellant. 
Anil K. Pandey, Pankaj Kumar Singh, Vinod K. Tiwari and K.L. 
Janjani for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.B. SINHA, J. 1. Leave granted. 
G 
H 
674 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] lJ (Addi.) S.C.R. 
A 
2. Appellant was appointed as a daily wager on a remuneration of 
Rs.201- per day in the services of respondent No. 1 on 30.7.1988. He 
is said to have been involved in financial irregularities. His services were 
terminated on and from 16. 7 .1989. He raised an industrial dispute 
contending that his services were to be regularized after three months of 
;: 
B the joining the services. The said contention was accepted by the Presiding 
Officer, Labour Court in his award dated 30th November, 2002. On the 
said premise, the termination of services of the appellant was found to be 
illegal. It was directed : 
c 
" ... since the date of adopted this award employee Shree 
Mehboob Deepak s/o Shri Varan Singh shall be reestablished on 
his post in the investigation of old service and the other facililities 
or payment of the middle period after discharging date along with 
which he were obtain in service period should be paid." 
D 
It is
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.