The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Manoj Kumar

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged an award dated 04.12.2014 passed by the Labour Court in Case No. 10/ID Ref./2010, which directed reinstatement of the respondent workman. The petitioners contended that even if the workman had completed 240 days of work in a calendar year, the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation in lieu of reinstatement, given that the workman had worked only from 01.11.1990 to December 1996 as a daily-wager.

The High Court examined the settled legal position laid down by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions including Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Bhurumal (2014) 7 SCC 177, Jayant Vasantrao Hiwarkar v. Anoop Ganpatrao Bobde (2017) 11 SCC 244, and Hari Nandan Prasad v. Management of Food Corporation of India (2014) 7 SCC 190, which consistently held that reinstatement with back wages is not automatic in cases of daily-wage workers whose termination is found illegal solely on account of procedural violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and that monetary compensation would meet the ends of justice in such cases.

The Court noted the clear judicial trend distinguishing between regular/permanent employees and daily-wage workers, and that where the termination of a daily-wager took place many years ago after a short period of service, the award of compensation in lieu of reinstatement is the appropriate remedy rather than reinstatement with full back wages.

Catchwords: daily-wage worker · reinstatement · compensation in lieu of reinstatement · illegal termination · Section 25-F Industrial Disputes Act · Labour Court award · certiorari · retrenchment · procedural violation · back wages