In a significant judgment that reinforces employee protection under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Uttarakhand High Court, in the case of M/S. Deltas PharmaVersus Smt. Adesh Kumari (2025 LLR WEB 539) has upheld the Labour Court’s awards directing reinstatement and full back wages to helpers who were orally dismissed without inquiry by their employer.
Justice Pankaj Purohit, while dismissing the writ petitions filed by the company, observed that the Labour Court’s findings were based on a sound appreciation of evidence and could not be termed as perverse or without jurisdiction.
The dispute arose when several helpers employed by Deltas Pharma were abruptly terminated from service, allegedly for misconduct and absenteeism, without any formal inquiry. The workers approached the Labour Court, contending that they had worked for more than 240 days in each year, thus earning protection under Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, which mandates retrenchment compensation and due process before termination.
Also read – What the UP Factories Amendment Act 2025 means – And How it Compares to Other States
The Labour Court had earlier ruled in favour of the workers, ordering their reinstatement with full back wages, holding that the employer failed to justify the dismissals or to establish any act of misconduct.
The High Court observed that the employer “failed to lead any evidence” to support its allegations of misconduct or unauthorised absence, while the workmen successfully established their continuous service .
“The findings of the Labour Court are unassailable as the petitioner failed to rebut the workmen’s testimony or substantiate its defence. The awards granting reinstatement with back wages are neither perverse nor beyond jurisdiction,” the Court held in paragraphs 6 to 8 of the judgment.
Key Learning:
- Oral dismissal without inquiry amounts to violation of principles of natural justice.
- Once a workman proves completion of 240 days of service, the onus shifts to the employer to disprove continuity.
- In the absence of credible evidence from the employer, reinstatement with back wages remains a justified relief.
