24 June 2025 Industrial Law >> Business & Commercial Law   |   Employee Related >> Corporate Law  

The Bombay High Court recently dismissed two writ petitions filed by the State of Maharashtra, challenging the concurrent orders of the Labour Court and Industrial Court that directed the reinstatement of two long-serving employees, Shanta Baban Sutar and Dattakumar Tukaram Kamble. The employees, a sweeper and an accounts clerk respectively, had their services terminated in 2017 after working continuously for the Krida Prabodhini, Kolhapur, for nearly 20 years.

The State argued that Krida Prabodhini is not an "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and therefore, the Labour Court lacked jurisdiction. They also contended that the employees were appointed on a temporary, daily-wage basis without following proper recruitment processes against sanctioned posts, thus not entitling them to permanency or reinstatement. The State further claimed that the Labour and Industrial Courts failed to consider these points and also did not address the employer-employee relationship with a specific issue.

Conversely, the employees' counsel emphasized their uninterrupted service for two decades, with gradual salary increases and promotions, indicating a clear employer-employee relationship. They highlighted that their termination in 2017 was arbitrary, without show-cause notice, inquiry, or compensation, violating principles of natural justice. It was argued that keeping employees as casuals for such a long period was an unfair labor practice aimed at depriving them of permanent status and associated benefits.

The High Court, after reviewing the evidence, upheld the Labour and Industrial Courts' decisions. The Court noted that the employer's own witness admitted in cross-examination that the employees were appointed on sanctioned posts and were entitled to differential payments, indicating a formal employment relationship. The Court also found that the termination was motivated by the Petitioners' desire to outsource work, amounting to victimization. Crucially, the Court emphasized that the employer failed to follow due process, such as issuing a show-cause notice or conducting a departmental inquiry, before terminating the employees who had served for two decades in duties of a permanent nature.

Consequently, the High Court confirmed the judgments directing reinstatement with continuity of service and all statutory benefits. If the employees have not reached superannuation, they are to be immediately reinstated. If they have, their dues are to be computed and paid within four weeks. The Secretary of the School, Education, and Sports Department of Maharashtra State is mandated to ensure strict compliance with the judgment.

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947