RASHTRASANT TUKDOJI MAHARAJ TECHNICAL AND EDUCATION SOCIETY, NAGPUR v. DHANARAJ SHALIKRAM SHRIRAME AND OTHERS
Unauthorized Absence and Abandonment of Service: Employer's Right to Remove Employee Name from Muster Roll Without Retrenchment Under Industrial Disputes Act.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-NAG:5139
Decision Date: 09-05-2025
List of Laws
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971; Constitution of India, Article 14
- Facts: The Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Technical and Education Society (the petitioner) faced complaints from several employees who alleged their services were terminated unlawfully after they participated in a strike. The employees had issued a strike notice due to grievances regarding their appointments and pay. Despite an Industrial Court order directing them to cease the unfair labor practice of striking, the employees did not resume services. The petitioner sent repeated letters requesting them to return, but they remained absent. Consequently, the petitioner deleted their names from the muster roll, considering they had voluntarily abandoned their services. The Labour Court initially ruled in favor of the employees, setting aside the termination orders, but the petitioner challenged this decision.
- Procedural Posture: The petitioner, Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Technical and Education Society, filed writ petitions in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, challenging the judgments and orders passed by the Industrial Court and Labour Court, which had ruled in favor of the employees. The High Court is now considering these writ petitions.
- Issue: Did the removal of the employees' names from the muster roll by the petitioner amount to termination/retrenchment of services, requiring compliance with Section 25F and 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, or was it a consequence of the employees' voluntary abandonment of service?
- Holding: The High Court held that the removal of the employees' names from the muster roll did not amount to unlawful termination or retrenchment. The Court allowed the writ petitions, quashing the orders of the lower courts.
- Reasoning: The Court reasoned that the employees' prolonged unauthorized absence, despite repeated calls to resume duty, constituted voluntary abandonment of service. The Court relied on several Supreme Court judgments, including Vijay Sathaye and Sakattar Singh, which established that long unauthorized absence could lead to an inference of abandonment of service, negating the need for a domestic enquiry. The Court emphasized that the employer had provided reasonable opportunity for the employees to resume services, but they chose not to. Therefore, the deletion of their names from the muster roll was a consequential act, not a positive act of termination by the employer. The Court also noted that the employees' initial participation in an illegal strike further weakened their case.
🔒 For Members Only