Employee Who Did Not Perform Any Duties For Nearly 10 Years Cannot Seek Full Backwages: Supreme Court Modifies HC Order Granting Full Back Wages To RSRTC Employee
The Apex Court was considering the Appeal filed by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation.
Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that an employee of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation without performing any of his duties for nearly ten years cannot seek full back wages.
The Apex Court was considering the Appeal of the Corporation challenging the order whereby the respondent-employee was held to be entitled to full wages in respect of the intervening period under the order of termination.
The Division Bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said, “...on the Labour Court rejecting the permission sought for by the appellant herein, there was deemed continuation of employment of the respondent and therefore, the High Court has rightly observed that in the absence of any other intervening factor, the appellant was entitled to back wages…”
Advocate Ritu Bhardwaj represented the Appellant while AOR M. M. Kashyap represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
It was brought to the Court’s notice that initially, the High Court while disposing of the Special Appeal, by a judgment dated February 12, 2019, had ordered that only 50% of the back wages (half the back wages) by way of actual monetary benefit along with continuity of service for the intervening period from October 4, 2001 to November 30, 2010 may be awarded to the respondent-employee. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation was dismissed by the High Court.
However, the respondent’s Review Petition seeking full back wages for the aforesaid period was allowed and the Division Bench directed that the respondent herein was entitled to full wages in respect of the intervening period under the order of termination.
Arguments
It was the case of the Appellant-Corporation that the order passed in the Review Petition may be set aside.
The Respondent, on the other hand, contended that there was no merit in this appeal and the High Court was justified in granting full back wages.
Reasoning
Highlighting the fact that the case had a chequered history, the Bench observed that there was deemed continuation of employment of the respondent as the Labour Court rejected the permission sought by the appellant. As per the Bench, the High Court was right in holding that the appellant was entitled to back wages on the premise that there was continuity in service of the respondent herein.
“In our view, the High Court was justified in granting only 50% of the back wages by its initial order dated 12.02.2019. However, in the Review Petition the said order has been modified to grant full back wages which we find is not just and proper having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case and particularly having regard to the fact that for nearly ten years the respondent herein, without performing any of his duties, cannot at the same time seek full back wages”, it asserted.
Setting aside the order passed in the Review Petition and allowing the appeal in that regard, the Bench held, “Since the respondent has in the interregnum attained the age of superannuation, the appellant-Corporation shall comply with the directions of the High Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.310/2018 dated 12.02.2019 and grant all monetary benefits that the respondent is entitled to owing to his superannuation, if any, within a period of one month from today.”
Cause Title: Chief Manager of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation v. Haneef Khan (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 250)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocate Ritu Bhardwaj, AOR Anil Kumar Gautam
Respondent: AOR M. M. Kashyap, Advocates Poonam Seth, Ilin Saraswat, Mona