Acceptance of an award declaring termination illegal entitles the workman to back wages and continuity of service.

The appellant (workman) was terminated by the respondent-Corporation on December 26, 1991, without statutory approval

After the rejection of their approval application, the Corporation voluntarily reinstated him on December 24, 1993

The Labour Court subsequently awarded the workman 50% back wages for this initial period of termination (1991–1993), which the Corporation unsuccessfully challenged

However, on January 1, 2003, the Corporation terminated the workman again after the High Court eventually granted approval for the original 1991 termination in a separate proceeding

The workman challenged this 2003 termination in L.C.V. No. 1450 of 2003. The Labour Court held the 2003 termination illegal, ordering reinstatement and continuity of service but denying back wages

The Corporation accepted the reinstatement order, but the workman appealed the denial of back wages. A Single Judge dismissed his writ petition, leading to this Letters Patent Appeal

1. Whether the workman was entitled to back wages for the period of the second illegal termination from January 1, 2003, until his superannuation on October 31, 2010

The court applied the principle that if a termination is found to be illegal and the management accepts the finding of illegality by not challenging the reinstatement order, the workman may be entitled to a portion of back wages depending on the circumstances of the case

The court exercised its discretionary jurisdiction under industrial law to determine the "appropriate" quantum of back wages to balance the interests of the parties

The Court noted that the Corporation had accepted the Labour Court's finding that the second termination dated January 1, 2003, was illegal

The Bench observed a pattern where the Corporation appeared intent on depriving the workman of the opportunity to render service, evidenced by the repeated terminations

Since the Corporation did not challenge the award of reinstatement and continuity of service, the illegality of the termination attained finality

The Court reasoned that in such a scenario, the complete denial of back wages was unjustified. Given the long history of litigation and the fact that the workman had reached superannuation, the Court determined that awarding 20% back wages for the period from the second termination to retirement was just and equitable

The Court further directed the Corporation to compute and pay the benefits relating to continuity of service within eight weeks