G.M., B.S.N.L. & ORS. versus MAHESH CHAND

G.M., B.S.N.L. & ORS. versus MAHESH CHAND

The award for reinstatement is unsustainable as the burden of proof that the workman completed 240 days of continuous service rests with the workman, not the employer; respondent failed to discharge this burden by cogent evidence.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: G.M., B.S.N.L. & ORS.; Respondent: Mahesh Chand
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Rajasthan High Court Dismissing Special Appeal Against Single Judge Upholding Tribunal Award
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Termination of Service, Industrial Disputes Act, Section 25 F, Continuous Service Requirement, Onus of Proof, Evidence in Termination Cases
Labour Law Termination of Service Industrial Disputes Act Section 25 F Continuous Service Requirement Onus of Proof Evidence in Termination Cases

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G.M., B.S.N.L. & ORS.

Appellant

Mahesh Chand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Rajasthan High Court Dismissing Special Appeal Against Single Judge Upholding Tribunal Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent-workman had worked continuously for 240 days in a calendar year
  2. 2 Whether termination of the respondent's service was legal without compliance with Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
  3. 3 Whether the onus to prove 240 days' continuous work lies on the employer or the workman

Ratio Decidendi

The award for reinstatement is unsustainable as the burden of proof that the workman completed 240 days of continuous service rests with the workman, not the employer; respondent failed to discharge this burden by cogent evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Award for reinstatement set aside
  • No order as to costs