Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur v. Shri Phool Chand(Dead) Through L.Rs., CIVIL APPEAL NO.1756 OF 2010, Decided on 20/09/2018.
BENCH: A two-judge bench decided this appeal by modifying the impugned judgement of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur. The bench was headed by:-
- JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
- JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
FACTS: The deceased (Phool Chand) was in the employment of the appellant (State Road Transport Corporation for the State of Rajasthan) as a driver. The appellant dismissed Phool Chand from the service on the charge of his continuous absence from the work, which was proved.
Phool Chand felt aggrieved by his dismissal and filed an application before the Labour Court which held the charge as proved but interfered in the quantum of punishment. The Labour Court converted the punishment of removal from service to “stoppage/forfeit of four annual grade increments without cumulative effect” and directed the reinstatement of the deceased workman in service with award of full back wages for the period of 13 years.
The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court of Rajasthan which was dismissed due to which appellant filed intra court appeal. By impugned order, the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the special appeal and upheld the order of the Single Judge.
As a result appellant approached the Supreme Court.
LEGAL ISSUE:
Whether the Courts:- the High Court and the Labour Court were justified in awarding full back wages to the deceased workman after setting aside his dismissal order.
CONTENTIONS:
By appellant:
- Labour court and high court were not correct in setting aside the dismissal of the employee.
- Courts were wrong in awarding full back wages to the respondent.
- Their orders should be set aside.
By respondent:
- Courts were right while coming to such decision.
- Decision of the courts should be upheld.
OBSERVATIONS: The Supreme Court observed that:-
- A workman had no right to claim back wages from his employer as of right only because the courts below had set aside his dismissal order in his favor and directed his reinstatement in service.
- The employer was also entitled to prove that the employee was gainfully employed during the relevant period and hence not entitled to claim any back wages. Initial burden was on the employee.
HELD: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part by modifying the impugned order in the following manner:-
- Respondents (legal representatives of Late Phool Chand) were awarded 50% of the total back wages.
- Appellant was directed to pay the amount to the respondents after proper verification within 3 months from the date of this judgment.
For full judgement refer: https://www.supremecourt.gov.in/supremecourt/2008/18738/18738_2008_Judgement_20-Sep-2018.pdf
