Twelve respondents instituted a civil suit before the Senior Sub-Judge against the employer's action of their termination and retrenchment from service. The reliefs they claimed in the suit consists in the: Declaration t

CS Professional · Labour Laws & Practice · PYQS · June 2023
Twelve respondents instituted a civil suit before the Senior Sub-Judge against the employer's action of their termination and retrenchment from service. The reliefs they claimed in the suit consists in the: Declaration to the effect that the orders of their termination or retrenchment from service were illegal, and Entitlement against the retrenchment with back wages. It was pleaded that the plaintiffs-respondents were skilled workers working in a hydel project in Alandpur in various capacities such as T. Mate, Mixer Operator, Beldar etc. for more than 5 years and therefore as per the standing orders and the rules, they were regular employees of the defendants. It was alleged that the defendant-appellants did not maintain any seniority list of the workers and different categories of services on the said project and they arbitrarily removed the plaintiffs-respondents from service by obtaining their signatures on papers under coercion and force and also forcing them to accept payments. It was further alleged that the defendant-appellants while removing plaintiffs-respondents did not comply with seniority criteria. As a result, juniors were retained in service and seniors were retrenched. It was alleged that the action was discriminatory and contrary to law resulting in victimization. This claim of the plaintiffs-respondents was contested by the defendant-appellants on the grounds that common suit could not have been filed since the cause of action of each defendant was distinct and separate; the plaintiffs-respondents were appointed on purely temporary basis and after the completion of the project, their services were validly terminated. On the contrary, the plaintiffs-respondents claimed injunction and reinstatement. On the diligent perusal of the above case, answer the following questions referring to legal provisions and decided case law, if any: Whether the orders of termination by the way of retrenchment of the plaintiffs-respondents are illegal and ineffective ?

Answer & Explanation:

According to Section 25G of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, where any workman in an industrial establishment, who is a citizen of India, is to be retrenched and he belongs to a particular category of workmen in that establishment, in the absence of any agreement between the employer and the workman in this behalf, the employer shall ordinarily retrench the workman who was the last person to be employed in that category, unless for reasons to be recorded the employer retrenches any other workman. It is clear that the retrenchment must be based on the principle last come first go. Further, as per Rule 77 of the Industrial Dispute (Central) Rules, 1957, it is the obligation of the employer to prepare the list of all workmen in the particular category from which the retrenchment is contemplated. The seniority list must be pasted on the notice board at least 7 days before the date of actual retrenchment. The facts of the case are similar to Chief Engineer, Hydel Project vs. Ravinder Nath & Ors. held on 24 January, 2008 . The defendant-appellants while terminating the service of 12 respondents did not observe the principle (procedure) for retrenchment of workmen as per Section 25G of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. In an industrial establishment, there may be different categories of workmen depending upon the duration and nature of their service. These may be category of persons who have completed 1 year of continuous service or might be another category not having completed continuous service of one year. The defendant-appellants did not observe the aforesaid principle while terminating their services and hence conditions precedent for valid retrenchment have not been complied with the termination of 12 plaintiffs-respondents, were held illegal and ineffective.

Topics: Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

Open in Interactive Practice Hub · Full Practice Hub · Chapter Weightage · More in this subject

Related Questions in this Topic