HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus OM PAL

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus OM PAL

Service in two separate establishments, without transfer, cannot be clubbed for the purpose of continuity of service under the Industrial Disputes Act. Reinstatement with full back wages was not justified as the respondent worked for a short period and was not entitled to such relief.

Parties
Appellant: Haryana Urban Development Authority; Respondent: Om Pal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal Against High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed
Legal Topics
Reinstatement, Back Wages, Continuity of Service, Distinct Establishments
Labour Law Industrial Law Reinstatement Back Wages Continuity of Service Distinct Establishments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Haryana Urban Development Authority

Appellant

Om Pal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appeal Against High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether period of service in distinct establishments can be clubbed for the purpose of s.25F read with s.25B of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
  2. 2 Whether reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service is justified on facts

Ratio Decidendi

Service in two separate establishments, without transfer, cannot be clubbed for the purpose of continuity of service under the Industrial Disputes Act. Reinstatement with full back wages was not justified as the respondent worked for a short period and was not entitled to such relief.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed

Orders

  • Award of reinstatement with full back-wages set aside
  • Appellant directed to pay respondent Rs.25,000/-