Corporation's Salary Records Confirm Continuous Service Of 240+ Days: Bombay HC Upholds Labour Court Order Reinstating A Gardener
In a writ petition filed by a corporation challenging the Labour Court's directive for the worker's reinstatement, the Bombay High Court observed that the corporation's salary records for 1998 explicitly indicate that the worker had achieved a 'continuous service of 248 days.'
The Court upheld the Labour Court's decision, declaring the termination unlawful, and directed the worker's reinstatement with full back wages.
The Bench of Justice Milind N. Jadhav observed, “The only case pleaded by the Petitioner Corporation is that Respondent worker had not completed 240 days but according to them had completed 230 days is itself falsified from the record produced by the Corporation itself. As seen above, it is the Corporation’s own document prepared by the Education Officer of the Corporation on 29.5.2009 which clearly states that Respondent worker was paid salary for 248 days during his tenure in the year 1998 from 03.01.1998 to 31.10.1998”.
Advocate Dhruti Kapadia appeared for the Petitioner/Corporation and Advocate Sanjiv A. Sawant appeared for the Respondent.
The Petitioner, a corporation, employed the Respondent as a Caretaker cum Gardener on a daily wage basis. The Respondent claimed unpaid wages for weekends and public holidays, alleged unjust denial of permanency, and contended illegal termination. The Labour Court ruled in favour of the Respondent, ordering reinstatement with full back wages. The Petitioner contended that the Respondent did not complete 240 continuous days, emphasizing multiple appointment letters and evidence supporting fewer than 230 days of service. Aggrieved, the Petitioner approached the High Court by way of Writ Petition challenging the judgment and order.
The Court noted that the Education Officer of the Petitioner Corporation, in a report filed during the Reference (IDA) proceeding, admitted that the Respondent worked for 248 days in the calendar year of 1998. Despite this, the corporation deliberately excluded Sundays and holidays to deny him permanency. The Respondent presented evidence, including an attendance sheet, proving continuous work for ten months. The Labour Court noted that the artificial breaks in the appointment letters were meant to deny permanency benefits. The Labour Court had concluded that the Respondent worker established working for 240 days, rendering his termination unlawful.
In this case, the Bench observed that the Respondent, employed continuously from April 1995 to October 1998, was given artificial breaks on paper, indicating the Petitioner's intention to deny him permanency. Despite the Petitioner's claim that the Respondent hadn't completed 240 days, the Petitioner's document confirmed payment for 248 days in 1998.
“Once the aforesaid has been clearly established on the basis of oral as well as documentary evidence, there is no reasonable doubt that the Respondent worker was in continuous service for more than 240 days in the preceding calendar year and therefore his oral termination is rendered illegal. It is clearly seen that the Respondent worker was in continuous service and assuming if he was retrenched or terminated, then the provisions of Section 25-F of the said Act would get attracted. Having not done so, the termination of the Respondent worker was bad in law and therefore he is entitled to reinstatement”, the Bench noted.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Petition and upheld the impugned order.
Cause Title: Administrative Officer (School) Municipal Mahanagar Palika v Bhujgonda K. Kamble (2023:BHC-AS:39506)
