In Brief
A workman challenged the High Court's decision setting aside the Industrial Tribunal's award directing his reinstatement with back wages. The central issue was whether the workman had completed one year of continuous service as required by Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's factual finding that the workman lacked continuous service for one year was binding and could not be re-examined. However, the Court upheld the High Court's direction that amounts already paid to the workman during pendency of Section 17B proceedings could not be recovered, as such proceedings are independent of the main case outcome. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.