LexSHRIPAL & ANR. versus NAGAR NIGAM, GHAZIABAD
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 1 S.C.R. 1427 : 2025 INSC 144 Shripal & Anr. v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (Civil Appeal No. 8157 of 2024) 31 January 2025 [Vikram Nath* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the services of the appellant-workmen (gardeners) were terminated without complying with Sections 6E and 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Appellants, if entitled to reinstatement with back wages as also regularization of their services. Headnotes† U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – ss.6E, 6N – Non-compliance with: Held: The pattern of direct oversight and wage disbursement negates the stand of the Respondent-Employer that the Appellant- Workmen were “contractor’s personnel” – Appellants were pressing for regularization and proper wages through pending conciliation proceedings, however, the Employer proceeded to discontinue their services, without issuing prior notice or granting retrenchment compensation – Discontinuation of the Appellants’ services, effected without compliance with ss.6E and 6N was illegal – Appellants were performing the same tasks of planting, pruning, general upkeep as regular Gardeners – The principle of “equal pay for equal work” cannot be casually disregarded when workers continuously served for extended periods in roles resembling those of permanent employees – Long-standing assignments under the Employer’s direct supervision belie any notion that these were mere short-term casual engagements – Employer’s plea of lack of an employer- employee relationship is not supported by evidence – Furthermore, reliance on a general “ban on fresh recruitment” cannot be used to deny labor protections to long serving workmen – Uma Devi cannot be used to justify exploitative engagements persisting for years without the Employer undertaking legitimate recruitment – Impugned order of the High Court, to the extent it confines the * Author 1428 [2025] 1 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Appellants to future daily-wage engagement without continuity or meaningful back wages, is set aside – Orders/communications terminating services, quashed – Respondent shall reinstate and regularize the Appellants – Appellants to be treated as continuing in service from the date of their termination, entitled to 50% of the back wages in the terms directed. [Paras 10, 13, 11,18] Labour Laws – Labour jurisprudence – Failure of Employer to produce muster rolls – Adverse inference can be drawn against the Employer: Held: Failure of the Employer to furnish muster rolls in full despite directions, leads to an adverse inference – Indian labour law strongly disfavors perpetual daily-wage or contractual engagements in circumstances where the work is permanent in nature – Morally and legally, workers who fulfil ongoing municipal requirements year after year cannot be dismissed summarily as dispensable, particularly in the absence of a genuine contractor agreement. [Para 15] Case Law Cited Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi [2006] 3 SCR 953 : (2006) 4 SCC 1 – held inapplicable. Jaggo v. Union of India [2024] 12 SCR 1235 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826 – relied on. List of Acts U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. List of Keywords Sections 6E, 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Gardeners; Permanent employees; Horticulture Department; Ghaziabad Nagar Nigam; Municipality; Termination; Reinstatement; Back wages; Regularization of service; Direct oversight; Wage disbursement; Employer-employee relationship; Employer’s direct supervision; Casual engagements/employees; Municipal functions; Pending conciliation proceedings; Discontinuation of services; “equal pay for equal work”; Contractor; Third-party contractor; Daily-wage engagement; Daily-wage; Contractual engagements; Muster rolls; Contractual Hiring; Public Employment; Prior notice; Retrenchment compensation; Municipal duties; Permanent posts; Labour laws; Labour jurisprudence; “ban on fresh recruitment”. [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1429 Shripal & Anr. v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8157 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 01.03.2019 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in WC No. 13381 of 2012 With Civil appeal No(s). 8158-8179 Of 2024 Appearances for Parties Ms. Amiy Shukla, Shakti Vardhan, Shantanu Kumar, Malak Manish Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Ms. Sukanya Joshi, Advs. for the Appellants. Shakti Vardhan, Ms. Amiy Shukla, Shantanu Kumar, Malak Manish Bhatt,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.