'Such Acts Cannot Be Pardoned': Bombay HC Upholds Enquiry Findings Against Trade Union Office Bearer For His FB Post Inciting Hatred

The Bombay High Court has stressed the importance of restraint being exercised by the office bearers of recognised unions while condemning a violent Facebook post made by a trade union office bearer, inciting violence against the company.

The Court also noted that the freedom of speech and expression cannot be allowed to be transgressed beyond reasonableness.

In that context, the Bench of Justice Milind N Jhadav observed that, "Freedom of speech and expression cannot be allowed to be transgressed beyond reasonableness. If that is allowed, it could lead to disastrous consequences. In a given case, one cannot and should not wait for the consequences to occur. Such acts itself are required to be nipped in the bud. Otherwise it would convey a wrong signal to the society at large."

In light of the same, it was held that, "Considering the fact that the Petitioner - Company employed thousands of workmen, such posts and the comments thereof when read by any disgruntled workman could have led to any disorderly act. When it was an admitted position that wage settlement talks were going on for several months, a much greater degree of restraint is called upon to be exercised by the office bearers of the recognized Union who hold active parleys with the Petitioner – Company. However if the same office bearers of the recognized Union themselves do not practice restraint and have faith in the statutory provisions of law and commit such an act by posting posts which invoke hatred and are by itself provocatory, such acts cannot / should not be pardoned. A strong message needs to be sent out against such acts."

Senior Counsel KS Bapat appeared for the petitioner, while Counsel Nitin Kulkarni appeared for the respondent.

In this case, a company appealed against a Labour Court's decision that deemed the chargesheet against a workman, who posted allegedly violent Facebook content against the company, as illegal.

The workman, also a trade union office bearer, criticized the management's treatment of workers in the posts. The company argued that the Labour Court erred in finding no connection between the workman's misconduct and ongoing negotiations about wage settlements and service conditions.

The workman's defense maintained that the posts, even if authored by him, were made outside the company premises, making it inappropriate to apply certain clauses related to discipline and behavior within the establishment.

The Court noted that Facebook could easily be accessed through the mobile phone, and therefore, the argument that the workman did not have a computer nor he was on the premises of the establishment could not be proved or accepted.

Further, the Court noted that a serious comment of taking resort to weapons and assaulting the management personnel was commented upon in reply to the first Facebook post. In that context, it was further observed that, "office bearers of the recognized Union themselves do not practice restraint and have faith in the statutory provisions of law and commit such an act by posting posts which invoke hatred and are by itself provocatory, such acts cannot / should not be pardoned. A strong message needs to be sent out against such acts."

Accordingly, the petition succeeded, and it was held that the enquiry conducted against Respondent - workman was absolutely fair and proper.

Cause Title: Hitachi Astemo Fie Pvt. Ltd vs Nirajkumar Prabhakarrao Kadu

Click here to read/download the Judgment