Claim for back wages is untenable where the order quashing reinstatement has attained finality.

The appellant (workman) challenged his termination before the Labour Court, which directed his reinstatement but denied back wages

The management challenged the reinstatement in Special Civil Application No. 8667 of 2023.

On December 24, 2024, the High Court set aside the reinstatement order, ruling that the appellant did not qualify as a "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

The appellant did not challenge this order, allowing it to attain finality

Subsequently, the appellant filed Special Civil Application No. 3466 of 2025, seeking the back wages originally denied by the Labour Court

The learned Single Judge dismissed this petition, holding that since the reinstatement award was quashed, the claim for back wages was untenable

The appellant then preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal

1. Whether a claim for back wages can be entertained when the underlying award of reinstatement has been set aside by a court and such order has attained finality

2. Whether the appellant can rely on a Division Bench judgment involving a similarly situated employee to seek relief despite a final adverse order in his own case

3. Whether the appellant should be granted liberty to withdraw the appeal to challenge the original order setting aside his reinstatement at this belated stage

Definition of "workman" under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Principle of finality of judgments, where an unchallenged judicial order becomes binding on the parties

Back wages are a consequential relief contingent upon the validity of a reinstatement order; if the primary relief of reinstatement is nullified, the secondary claim for back wages cannot survive

The Court reasoned that the appellant’s entire claim for back wages was founded upon the Labour Court’s award of reinstatement

However, that foundation was removed when the learned Single Judge quashed the reinstatement order on December 24, 2024

Because the appellant failed to challenge that specific order, it became final

The Court rejected the appellant's reliance on a different Division Bench judgment regarding a CNC operator, noting that such a precedent is of no consequence when the appellant's own case has already been concluded by a final order

The Court further emphasized that the moment an award of reinstatement is quashed, any claim for back wages is automatically nullified

The Court dismissed the request to withdraw the appeal with liberty to file a fresh appeal against the 2024 order, characterizing the request as "wholly misconceived"

The request for liberty to challenge the previous order at this stage was expressly rejected

The High Court dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal, holding that there was no justification to entertain the claim