NANDKISHORE SHRAVAN AHIRRAO versus KOSAN INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.

Citation: [2020] 1 S.C.R. 90 · Decided: 10-01-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
90
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 1 S.C.R.
NANDKISHORE SHRAVAN AHIRRAO
v.
KOSAN INDUSTRIES (P) LTD.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 201-202 of 2020)
JANUARY 10, 2020
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD AND
HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Service Law – Continuity of service – Appellant was dismissed
from service for causing disruption of work – The Labour Court
came to the conclusion that the order of dismissal was harsh and
granted reinstatement in service with 25% back wages for the
surplus days – The High Court affirmed the order of reinstatement
and set aside the order for payment of 25% back wages – The High
Court also observed that the Labour Court had ‘rightly passed the
judgment and award reinstating the respondent without continuity
of service’ – On appeal before the Supreme Court, the appellant
contended that the High Court was in error in misconstruing the
award of the Labour Court as having denied continuity of service –
Held: Ex facie, the Labour Court having awarded reinstatement to
the appellant, continuity of service would follow as a matter of law
– The award of the Labour Court did not specifically deny continuity
of service – Hence, the observation of the High Court to the effect
that the Labour Court had denied continuity of service was erroneous
– The appellant was entitled to continuity of service – Further, the
High Court had no justification to set aside the award of 25% back
wages awarded by the Labour Court which was eminently fair and
proper – Thus, the direction of the High Court for deletion of back
wages was unsustainable – Accordingly, direction of the High Court
set aside.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. Ex facie, the Labour Court having awarded
reinstatement to the appellant, continuity of service would follow
as a matter of law. The award of the Labour Court does not
specifically deny continuity of service. Hence the observation of
   [2020] 1 S.C.R. 90
90
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
91
the High Court to the effect that the Labour Court had denied
continuity of service is erroneous and would accordingly stand
corrected in terms of what has been observed herein-above. The
appellant would be entitled of service. [Para 7] [93-B]
2.  On the question of back wages, the Labour Court had
confined the award of back wages to 25%. Having come to the
conclusion that the findings in the disciplinary enquiry was
perverse, the Labour Court observed that it was a matter of record
that the workman has been gainfully employed over a part of the
period after dismissal, with another employer. It was in the above
circumstances, that the entire component of back wages was not
awarded to the appellant and only 25% was awarded. The High
Court has no justification to set aside the award of 25% back
wages awarded by the Labour Court which was eminently fair
and proper. The direction of the High Court for deletion of
back wages is therefore unsustainable and is set aside. [Para 8]
[93-C-E]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 201-
202 of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 05.02.2013 of the High Court
of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No. 8536 of 2008
and order dated 24.03.2014 in Civil Application (for Condonation of delay)
No. 5613 of 2013 in Letters Patent Appeal (Stamp) No. 697 of 2013.
Prashant Chawdhary, Priank Adhyaru, Rameshar Prasad Goyal,
Advs. for the Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant  was employed in the Assembly department of
the respondent. He was served with a charge-sheet on 26 June 1992.
The charge against the appellant was of causing disruption of work
between 1050 am and 12 noon on 17 June 1992. Following a departmental
enquiry, the appellant was dismissed  from  service on 26  November
1997. In pursuance  of  a  reference made  under  the  Industrial  Disputes
Act  1947,  the  Labour  Court  by  its  award dated 27 February 2008
came to the conclusion that the findings in the enquiry were perverse;
NANDKISHORE SHRAVAN AHIRRAO v. KOSAN INDUSTRIES (P)
LTD.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
92
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 1 S.C.R.
that the order of dismissal was harsh and granted reinstatement in service
with 25% back wages for the surplus days.
3. The  order  of  the  Labour  Court  was  questioned  before  the
High  Court  of Gujarat  by  the  employer.  A  learned  Single  Judge  of
the  High  Court,  by  a judgment  dated 5  February  2013,  partly
allowed  the  Special  Civil Application. While affirmin
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.