The Supreme Court has held that effective relief could be granted to a worker under the Labour Laws only if the permanent and complete address of the workman was furnished in the pleadings for effective service of the notices.

The Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed that “Even if the representative of the workman is appearing, he shall furnish permanent address of the workman as well. Even in proceedings subsequent to first stage, it shall be mandatory to provide permanent address of the party for his service. Merely mentioning through Labour Union or authorised representatives, who are sometimes union leaders or legal practitioners, will not be sufficient. Service of notice of workman will have to be effected on the permanent address of the workman.”

Advocate Sonal Gupta appeared for the Appellant.

In this case, the appeal was preferred against the order of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court wherein the decision of the Single Bench and the Labour Court was upheld. The Labour Court had directed reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service from 1997 with full back wages.

On perusal of the record, the Apex Court noted that various efforts made by the Court to serve notice to the respondent effectively were all in vain as the respondent had not furnished his own permanent address, but his address was through some Union.

The Apex Court further said that the respondent was represented by a counsel and the counsel stated before the Court that the respondent would report for the duty, though he never reported for the duty. Therefore, it could not be said that the respondent was unaware about the challenge to the award of the Labour Court and dismissal of the Writ Petition.

“ our opinion the award of the Labour Court granting backwages and continuity in service to the respondent workman deserves to be set aside as he has not reported for duty despite the statement made by his counsel in Court on 30.10.2007. The present appeal cannot be kept pending as the conduct of the respondent itself establishes that he is no more interested in employment what to talk of back-wages.” observed the Apex Court.

Accordingly, the Appeal was allowed.

Cause Title- M/s. Creative Garments Ltd. v. Kashiram Verma

Click here to read/download the Judgment