Union Bank of India & another vs. Vinod Kumar Dwivedi

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Single Judge)

MP, 2560 of 2020, Judgment Date: Nov 07, 2020

Law laid down - 

Labour/Service Law - The respondent/workman was dismissed from service on the ground that he was party to illegal release of pension of a widow to an incompetent person. The Industrial Tribunal opined that workman was a private driver of a Bank Manager till 2009. Thereafter, he became Peon in the Bank and not responsible for sanction or release of pension. The Clerical Staff and officers who were responsible for sanction and release of pension were inflicted with minor punishments. The Tribunal found that punishment imposed on workman is discriminatory and smacks of conspiracy. In absence of challenge to these findings, the relief of grant of backwages was examined by the Court.

Backwages - When dismissal order was found to be illegal and invalid, it can follow with direction of continuance of service and backwages etc. However, if the punishment was interfered only because it was disproportionate in nature and substituted by a smaller punishment, there is no automatic reinstatement nor benefit of continuity of service and backwages can be granted. Two exceptions to this principle are that (i) where termination is set aside on the ground that employee was not found guilty of misconduct; (ii) where Court records a finding that enquiry held in respect of a frivolous issue or petty misconduct as a camouflage to get rid of employee or victimize him and the disproportionate excessive punishment imposed is result of such intention. In these cases, principle relating to grant of backwages will be the same as those applied in the cases of illegal termination.

Second Exception - In the instant case, the Tribunal has given a finding which shows that the respondent was victimized, subjected to discriminatory treatment and conspiracy and hence second exception is attracted.

Precedent - The judgment of Supreme Court can not be read as Euclid’s Theorem or like a statute. Blind reliance on a judgment without considering the fact situation is bad in law.

The decision of a Court should be understood in the fact situation of a case and by taking factual contexts in mind. A single different fact may change the precedential value of a judgment.

Article 227 of the ConstitutionThe award does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, patent illegality, palpable procedural impropriety or perversity, interference is declined.

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947- 5th Schedule-Unfair Labour Practice- If the workman is dismissed by way of victimization, not in good faith or as a colourable exercise of power, for patently false reasons or subjected to disproportionate punishment, it amounts an ‘unfair labour practice’

Union Bank of India & another vs. Vinod Kumar Dwivedi