STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR. versus RAJ KUMAR

Citation: [2019] 1 S.C.R. 94 · Decided: 07-01-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
94
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 1 S.C.R.
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.
v.
RAJ KUMAR
(Civil Appeal Nos. 124-125 of 2019)
JANUARY 07, 2019
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Labour Laws – Re-instatement – Termination of daily wager
– Dispute raised after 25 years – Respondent-worker worked as
beldar in the State PWD department as a daily wager for about a
year and was terminated – Labour court awarded Rs.30,000 as
monetary compensation in full and final settlement against his claim
for reinstatement – High Court modified the award and directed
State to reinstate without awarding him any back wages – On appeal,
held: Respondent having worked as daily wager had no right to
claim regularization or right to continue as daily wager – Dispute
was raised almost 25 years of alleged termination – The case of the
respondent squarely  fell in the category of cases discussed in Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Ltd.  – Monetary compensation of Rs.1 lakh awarded
to the respondent in full and final satisfaction of his claim of re-
instatement and other consequential benefits by taking recourse to
the powers under s.11-A of the Act in place of Rs.30,000/- awarded
by the Labour Court – Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
– s.11-A.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The respondent claimed to have worked as daily
wager hardly for a period of one year or so in PWD of the State;
Secondly, he had no right to claim regularization; Thirdly, he had
no right to continue as daily wager and lastly, the dispute was
raised by the respondent (workman) almost after 25 years of the
alleged termination before the Labour Court. The case of the
respondent would squarely  fall in the category of cases discussed
by this Court in Para 34 of the judgment rendered in  Bharat
Sanchar Nigam Ltd.  It is just and reasonable to award a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/-  to the respondent in lieu of his right to claim re-
instatement and back wages in full and final satisfaction of this
[2019] 1 S.C.R. 94
94
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
95
dispute in place of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Labour Court.
[Paras 12, 13 and 15][98-C-D, G]
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Bhurumal (2014) 7
SCC 177 : [2013] 16 SCR 1023; District Development
Officer and Anr. v. Satish Kantilal Amerelia (2018) 12
SCC 298 : [2017] 12 SCR 414 - referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2013] 16 SCR 1023
referred to
Para 10
[2017] 12 SCR 414
referred to
Para 10
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.
124-125 of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated  24.11.2015 of the High Court
of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 1116 (M/S) of 2015 and
order dated 27.06.2016 in Review Application MCC No. 333 of 2016.
Vishwa Pal Singh, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Advs. for the Appellants.
Pankaj Miglani, Dhaval Malhotra, for M/s. Lambat And
Associates, Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order
dated 24.11.2015 in W.P. No.1116 of 2015 and dated 27.06.2016 in
RAMCC No. 333 of 2016 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at
Nainital.
3. By impugned order dated 24.11.2015 passed in writ petition,
the High Court modified the award dated 25.02.2015 in Workman Disputes
Case No.45 of 2014  by which the Labour Court, Haridwar had awarded
compensation of Rs.30,000/-  to the respondent in lieu of reinstatement
and instead directed the State (appellant herein) to reinstate the
respondent (worker) without awarding to him  any back wages. The
High Court also granted liberty to the State to proceed against the
respondent (worker) in accordance with the provisions of the Uttar
Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Act”). Against this order, the State filed review application before the
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND v. RAJ KUMAR
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
96
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 1 S.C.R.
High Court.  The review was dismissed vide order dated 27.06.2016
which has now given rise to two special leave to appeals by State
questioning the legality and correctness of the main order dated 24.11.2015
and review order dated 27.06.2016 by way of special leave before this
Court.
4. It is the case of the respondent (worker) that he worked as
Beldar in the State PWD Department (Haridwar) as a daily wager for
about a year from June 1986 to May 1987 and thereafter his services
were brought to an end by the State without following the due procedure
prescribed in law.
5. After almost 2
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.