SHOULD REINSTATEMENT AUTOMATICALLY FOLLOW IN A CASE WHERE THE ENGAGEMENT OF A DAILY WAGER HAS BEEN TERMINATED IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 25-F OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947.
The legal footing earlier was that if the court found that the termination was illegal, reinstatement with full back wages would eventually follow but this legal dynamic has gradually changed overtime and now the court is of the view that if the employment of a temporary workman is terminated or retrenched in violation of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and if the termination was not justified with specific reasons and was found illegal, a one time monetary compensation is the correct remedy and not reinstatement or regularization with back wages. The proviso of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 states that: No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until— a) the workman has been given one month’s notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been ...