AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 176 wordsLeave granted.
In the present case, admittedly, the respondents had worked only from 1978-1987. They woke up in the year 2010, i.e., 23 years later and moved the Labour Court which obliged them by granting them reinstatement without backwages. Delay was specifically argued and turned down on the ground that backwages were not granted, which is why, delay will not come in the way. In the writ petition that was filed by the State, delay was again put in the forefront but, without any finding thereon, the writ petition was dismissed.
We are of the view that after such an inordinately long delay there is no question of reinstatement. The Labour Court has given a perverse finding when it stated that delay would be no bar as backwages are not given. Delay was a bar to any kind of relief and not merely backwages. Equally, the High Court in ignoring the plea of delay, failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it.
Consequently, we set aside the judgment of the Courts below and allow the appeals.