TALUKDAR SINGH Vs. TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD

Tags Service Law / Matter , Provident Funds Compensation

Supreme Court of India (Full Bench (FB)- Three Judge)

Appeal (Civil), 5701 of 2015, Judgment Date: Jul 24, 2015

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5701 OF 2015
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 26629/2014)

SHRI TALUKDAR SINGH ...Appellant

Versus

TATA ENGINEERING &
LOCOMOTIVE CO. Ltd. ...Respondent

J U D G M E N T

R. BANUMATHI, J.

Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of the order passed by the High Court of
Bombay in Writ Petition No.3646 of 2001 dated 19.06.2014, in and by which,
the High Court enhanced the retrenchment compensation of Rs.6,049/- awarded
by the Labour Court to Rs. 1,00,000/- without any interest.
3. A charge-sheet dated 07.05.1988 was issued to the
appellant for committing the misconduct of slapping his colleague, Mr.
Kunjumon who was working with the respondent-company. An enquiry was
conducted against the appellant and the services of the appellant were
terminated on 07.05.1990. The appellant challenged his termination and a
reference was made to the Labour Court, Pune. By the award dated
28.02.2000, Labour Court held that the enquiry against the appellant was
fair and proper and the misconduct was proved. However, the Labour Court
held that the punishment of dismissal from service was shockingly
disproportionate and awarded retrenchment compensation of Rs.6,049/- to the
appellant. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed writ petition contending
that the punishment of dismissal was harsh and that the retrenchment
compensation of Rs. 6,049/- awarded was no compensation at all. By the
impugned judgment, the High Court while upholding the punishment of
dismissal, enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/- minus
Rs.6,049/- which was already paid to the appellant. Still aggrieved, the
appellant has preferred this appeal.
4. We have heard Mr. S. Ravi Shankar, the learned counsel for
the appellant and the Learned Senior Counsel Mr. C.U. Singh, appearing
for the respondent-management and perused the impugned judgment and
material on record.
5. The short question is whether the compensation of
Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the High Court is to be enhanced. Appellant who
was an ex-serviceman was employed with the respondent-company as a Turner
in the Auto Division w.e.f. 09.01.1978 drawing monthly wage of Rs.2,621/-
and he worked till he was terminated on 07.05.1990. It is seen from the
record that Mr. Kunjumon used harsh words and shoved the appellant towards
the door and evidence would show that it was not a premeditated attack on
Mr. Kunjumon. Both the Labour Court as well as the High Court recorded
concurrent findings of fact that the misconduct of the appellant was proved
on the basis of the evidence and that the punishment of dismissal was
shockingly disproportionate. When the Labour Court passed the award, the
appellant was about 59 years and he attained the age of superannuation
in the year 2002. Considering the number of years which the appellant
worked with the respondent and the facts and circumstances of the case, we
are of the view that the interest of justice would be met if the
compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is enhanced to Rs.5,00,000/- which is
inclusive of the compensation awarded by the High Court. The judgment of
Bombay High Court is accordingly modified and the compensation is enhanced
to Rs.5,00,000/- which shall be payable by the respondent within a period
of eight weeks and in the event of default the same shall be payable with
interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and the appeal is partly allowed. No order
as to costs.

…………………………J.
(T.S. THAKUR)

…………………………J.
(V.GOPALA GOWDA)

…………………………J.
(R. BANUMATHI)
New Delhi;
July 24, 2015

ITEM NO.1H-For Judgment COURT NO.2 SECTION XV

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

C.A. No. 5701/2015 @ Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
26629/2014

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19/06/2014 in WP
No. 3646/2001 passed by the High Court Of Bombay)

TALUKDAR SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD Respondent(s)

Date : 24/07/2015 This appeal was called on for pronouncement of JUDGMENT
today.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Ravi Shankar,Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Debmalya Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Aman Singh, Adv.
Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv.
Mrs. Manik Karanjawala
For M/s. Karanjawala & Co.

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi pronounced the judgment of
the Bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
V. Gopala Gowda and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi.
Leave granted.
The appeal is partly allowed in terms of the Signed Reportable
Judgment.

(VINOD KR.JHA) (VEENA KHERA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

(Signed Reportable judgment is placed on the file)

Back to Judgments