'After Allowing Workmen To Work For 2 Decades, Management Cannot Challenge Award' : Supreme Court Allows Appeal Of FCI Workers

The Supreme Court recently decided the appeals preferred by both the Executive Union of workers and the Management of FCI against the judgment of the division bench of Jharkhand High Court wherein the workers were denied regularization of services but at the same time  directed that 75% of back wages was to be paid.

The bench of Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Kumar held that having allowed the workmen to render services for 2 decades to their own benefit, the management now cannot claim a right to challenge the award. The workmen altered their position and remained with FCI due to their absorption in services. Now, having put them in such a position, the management cannot turn back the clock.

The court referred to Union of India v N. Murugesan(2022) 2 SCC 25 where the court pointed out the meaning of approbate and reprobate. It means that a person cannot be allowed to have the benefit of an instrument while questioning the same. There’s an inbuilt fair play in the doctrine of election.

The bench agreed with the decision of the single bench of the high court which had upheld the award and therefore, allowed the appeal in favor of the workers of FCI.

Factual Background

By an order dated 12.01.1996, the Ministry of Labour had referred an industrial dispute raised by the Executive staff Union of Food Corporation of India raising the issues of 21 casual workers for adjudication. It was taken up by the Central govt tribunal, Dhanbad where the issue was whether FCI, Patna was justified in retrenching the services of Sh. Shashi Shankar and 20 others.

The tribunal held that retrenchment was void since they were neither given notice nor paid compensation. It directed management to reinstate them and regularise their services in class IV posts with effect from 1990 and pay 75% of back wages to them.

Aggrieved by the award, the management filed a writ before the Jharkhand High Court, where an interim stay was granted on condition to continue to pay last drawn wages to them.

Afterwards, a contempt petition was filed by workers seeking compliance with orders. The court held that if the management does not abide by the conditions, then the stay on the award will be vacated.

In 2000, the management implemented the award and workmen were absorbed into regular services. This was subject to final outcome of the writ petition filed by them.

The single judge disposed of the petition in 2018. It observed that such casual employees would only be entitled to regularisation in service as per section 25F of the Industrial disputes act, 1947, and not regularization in service. However, keeping in view that management had complied with the award for 18 years, the judge opined that it would cause great hardship to workers if the position was changed at this stage.

An appeal was preferred by the management before a division bench of the Jharkhand High Court in 2019. In 2020, the bench modified the order by not allowing regularization of service but the direction to pay 75% back wages was untouched.

COURT’S VERDICT

This court observed that the management had not assailed the award as far as reinstatement in service and payment of back wages is concerned before the division bench of the High court. Therefore, the management cannot raise those issues before the Supreme court.

The court emphasized that the management had chosen to fully implement the award during the pendency of the writ petition and the workmen availed its benefit for 18 years. The management had voluntarily chosen to implement the award in its totality even though conditional interim protection was granted to them.

There was no evidence of management seeking expeditious disposal of this writ petition after complying with the Award. The condition for interim order of the singe bench was that the management should pay the last drawn wages to the employees. However, the management went ahead and absorbed the workers.

"Having allowed the workmen to put in regular service to its own benefit for over two decades, the management can no longer claim an indefeasible right to continue with and canvass its challenge to the Award, merely because it made its compliance with the Award conditional long ago. In the light of their absorption in regular service, these workmen, who may have otherwise opted for employment opportunities elsewhere, altered their position and remained with the FCI. Having placed them in that position, it is no longer open to the management of FCI to seek to turn back the clock", the Court observed.

Case title- FCI Executive Staff Union v. Employer, Management of FCI, CIVIL APPEAL No. 4152 OF 2023 (@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 3656 OF 2021

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 491

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment