Full Judgment Text
1
NON- REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.2874 OF 2009
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) 1914 of 2008)
Malwa Vanaspati & Chemical Co. Ltd. …Appellant
Versus
Rajendra ..Respondent
J U D G M E N T
TARUN CHATTERJEE,J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Delay condoned.
th
3. On 11 of January, 2008, this Court passed the
following order :-
“Issue notice limited to question whether the
respondent was entitled to full back wages
or not. Issue notice also on the application
for condonation of delay.”
4. The respondent filed an application before the
Labour Court alleging that he was illegally terminated by
th
an oral order dated 5 of March, 1998 and that he was
2
not given any Show Cause Notice nor was he paid
retrenchment compensation.
5. The appellant contested the said application alleging
that the services of the respondent had not been
terminated and since the services had not been
terminated, the question of payment of retrenchment
compensation or issuance of Show Cause Notice did not
arise at all.
6. In February, 2000, in the light of the above matter,
the Labour Court directed the respondent to report for
duty and it is now an admitted position that the
respondent reported for duty on that date.
7. By a final award, the Labour Court passed an award
th
on 27 of September, 2002, directing the appellant to
take him on duty and directed payment of back wages.
In appeal, the Industrial Court dismissed the appeal of
the appellant.
3
8. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid
award passed by the Labour Court, the appellant filed a
writ petition, which was also dismissed by the High
Court. A Special Leave Petition against the order of the
High Court dismissing the writ petition and affirming the
award of the Labour Court has been filed, which on grant
of leave, was heard in the presence of the learned counsel
for the parties.
9. Since a limited notice was issued on the question
whether the respondent was entitled to full back wages or
not, we did not go into the question of reinstatement or
otherwise. On the aspect of payment of full back wages,
we are of the view that the appellant had already taken
the respondent in service and considering the fact that
the case of the appellant was that he was not terminated
at all, we are of the view that in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the back wages should be
paid to the extent of 50 per cent (50%) of the salary.
Accordingly, we dispose of this appeal by modifying the
award to the extent that the employee/respondent would
4
be entitled to back wages to the extent of 50 per cent
(50%) and not full back wages.
10. The award is accordingly modified and the order of
the High Court is set aside in part. The appeal is
disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
…………………………J.
[TARUN CHATTERJEE]
…………………………J.
[H. L. DATTU]
NEW DELHI;
.
April 28, 2009