Industrial Disputes Act, 1947– s.17-B– Between 1986-89, the respondents-workmen were engaged temporarily as Store Watchman on daily wages in newly created Sectional stores in various Sub Divisions under the control of Rural Water Supply (RWS) Divisions, Nagercoil – Engagement Order mentioned that the services will be terminated when the requirement is over and that they cannot claim any further appointment in the appellant-Board – Sectional stores closed– Respondents terminated – Labour Court directed reinstatement of the respondents with back wages for the period of non-employment and with continuity of service – Single Judge affirmed the award to the extent of reinstatement of the workmen and held that since the matter was pending from 1991, the respondents were entitled to get 50% back wages only – Writ appeal – Dismissed – Held: For temporary workers like respondents, it is mandatory to show that they continuously worked for 240 days in a year – Initial burden is on them to adduce evidence – Only when the initial burden is discharged by the respondents, the burden can be shifted on the appellant – Single Judge and the Division Bench not right in placing the burden on the appellant to prove that the respondents had not worked continuously for 240 days in a year – However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this question not gone into any further as most of the respondents have attained the age of superannuation therefore, there is no question of reinstatement – Amount already paid to each of the respondents (including Rs.2 lakhs ordered by the Supreme Court as condition for stay of the impugned judgment) shall be in full quit of all claims including 50% back wages and also the quantum of compensation in lieu of reinstatement – In appeal arising out of Writ Appeal No.1439 of 2016, Rs.2 lakhs be paid by the appellant to the legal representatives of the Respondent-since deceased – Amount lying in the deposit of Labour Court/High Court along with accrued interest be refunded to the appellant – Order passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, not a precedent.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 For temporary worker like NMR respondents, it is mandatory to show that they have continuously worked for
240 days in a year. The initial burden is upon the respondentsworkmen to adduce evidence showing that they have worked continuously for 240 days. Only when the initial burden is discharged by the respondents-workmen, the burden can be shifted upon the appellant-Board. Both the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench were not right in placing the burden upon the appellant-Board to prove that the respondents-workmen had not worked continuously for 240 days in a year. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this question is not gone into any further as most of the respondents have attained the age of superannuation therefore, there is no question of reinstatement. [Para 9] [865-F-H; 866-A]
1.2 The amount already paid to each of the respondents (including Rs.2,00,000/- ordered by the Supreme Court) shall be in full quit of all claims including 50% back wages and also the quantum of compensation in lieu of reinstatement. In appeal arising out of Writ Appeal No.1439 of 2016) Rs.2,00,000/- shall be paid by the appellant-Board to the legal representatives of the respondent-since deceased. The amount lying in the deposit of Labour Court/High Court along with accrued interest is ordered to be refunded to the appellant-Board. The above order is passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and may not be quoted as a precedent. [Paras 11, 12] [867-B-D]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.