Consequences of Refusal of workmen to do additional work without additional remuneration

Sundaram Industries Ltd. v. Employees Union, (2014) 2 SCC 600
Labour Law
Penalty/Punishment
Misconduct - Dismissal - When warranted - Nature, and circumstances in which misconduct committed - Refusal of
workmen to do additional work without additional remuneration, with reasonable/lawful justification - Refusal by workmen
moulders who operated rubber moulding machines to shoulder additional responsibility of placing their individual bags of
production on weighing scale at the end of their work shift without any additional remuneration, despite giving
undertaking to that effect and tendering apology for non-compliance - Held, proportionality of punishment depends on
circumstances in which alleged misconduct was committed as also nature of misconduct -
In instant case refusal of
workmen was not without lawful or reasonable justification and could not be described as contumacious - Such
instructions tantamount to changing service conditions which was impermissible and did not amount to deliberate
defiance or misconduct that could be punished - Hence, reinstatement with 50% back wages, confirmed, 
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Or. 41 R. 22 - Held, judgment can be supported by party in whose favour same has been delivered on grounds found in
his favour and can also be challenged on grounds that may have been held against him - On facts held, award of
Tribunal finding that though charges against respondent workmen were proved, but punishment of dismissal was
disproportionate to gravity of misconduct and consequently directing reinstatement with 50% back wages, could be
challenged in any proceeding regarding commission of misconduct by workmen,

Print Page