- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Employee's Length Of Service And...
Employee's Length Of Service And Employer's Conduct Relevant Considerations While Granting Back-Wages: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Udit Singh
6 Feb 2023 5:41 AM GMT
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur bench held that while granting back-wages, the length of service of an employee is required to be taken note of and at the same time, the conduct of the employer is also required to be seen. The bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi was hearing a petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution challenging the award of Labour Court through...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur bench held that while granting back-wages, the length of service of an employee is required to be taken note of and at the same time, the conduct of the employer is also required to be seen.
The bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi was hearing a petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution challenging the award of Labour Court through which Jagdish Prasad Sahu (respondent no. 2) was reinstated in service with full back-wages.
Sahu worked with the Environmental Planning and Coordination Organisation (EPCO) for almost a decade. He was appointed as a Chowkidar in January, 1989 and his services were terminated by the petitioners (Executive Director and Member Secretary of EPCO) by an oral order in June, 1990. Before terminating his services, neither any notice nor one month’s salary in lieu thereof was given to him.
The labour court passed an ex-parte award after the petitioners failed to appear before it, stating that Sahu's removal from service is illegal.
The High Court relied upon the decisions of Supreme Court in Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D.ED.) and others (2014) 6 SCC 434 and J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. K.P. Agrawal and another (2013) 10 SCC 324 where the Apex court has held that if order of reinstatement is based holding the termination illegal and it is also a case of employee that he was not gainfully employed after termination then reinstatement should be given with full back-wages. The Apex court further observed that onus is upon the employer to prove that after removal, the employee was gainfully employed.
The High court held:
“But here in this case, the said burden was not discharged by the petitioners despite the fact that the employee in his statement of claim and the statement recorded before the Presiding Officer stated that after his termination he was unemployed.”
The court further observed that the petitioners though contested the matter but had not shown any seriousness to dislodge the stand taken by Sahu or to dislodge the finding given by the Labour Court.
The court thus dismissed the petition and refused to interfere in the impugned award of the Labour Court.
Case Title: Executive Director, Environmental Planning and Coordination Organisation (MP) and Anr. v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Rewa (MP) and Anr.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 17
