Could we terminate his employment - remained absent from duties without permission for a period exceeding 10 days - CiteHR
Labour Law & Hr Consultant
Management Consultancy
Kritarth Consulting
Spl Educators Posh Programs; Hr & Ir
Dy. Manager (hr)
+2 Others

Cite.Co is a repository of information created by your industry peers and experienced seniors sharing their experience and insights.
Join Us and help by adding your inputs. Contributions From Other Members Follow Below...
A worker, mr.jahir of an industry establishment went on leave but remained absent from duties without permission for a period exceeding 10 days where upon the employer by notice terminated his service by issuing a notice as “we find that you are granted casual leave for two days ;with effect from 14-02-18 to 15-2-18 subsequently you pray for a month leave with effect from 16-02-18 to 15-03-18 on ground of your illness and you did not join work place after the end of the leave. More ever since you had failed to return within 10 days from the date of expiry of leave you had been terminated. You may collect your dues from our accounts department on any day during office hours.” Mr. jahir challenged the action before labour court
N:B : The company is situated at Odisha.
(Please solve it as per the labour law and mention the labour act and sections )

Dear Jobfryou,
This is not legally sustainable way of terminating the services of a workman particularly for unauthorized absence by overstayal of leave. Termination against unauthorized absence beyond certain no. of days though mentioned as such in the standing orders or service regulations can not be resorted to by such a mere notice as mentioned in your post for it would be a gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice.. You have to initiate formal disciplinary proceedings by issuing a charge-memo, conducting a domestic enquiry if no reply is received or charges are denied, obtain enquiry findings, deciding the punishment to be imposed and where it is dismissal, issuing a second show-cause notice mentioning the proposed dismissal and finally passing the dismissal orders.

Such Arbitrary Acts on the part of the Employer/Punishing Authority as stated in the Case Particulars, is more Due to Ignorance rather than Arrogance.
Anyone Can Make a Mistake as one under reference and then learn therefrom after undergoing few torments. The Lesson we Management Practioners epecially in HR or ER or IR Functions need to Learn is to Learn to Take Right Right First Time Every Time and unquestionable One Simple Acton-Plan is to Learn from Those Who have Learnt and are Learning, not the "Learned" kind.
Let all of us Get Together to ensure that None of Us Ever Cause Such Embarrsment and Anxieties to Workers Cadre, Supervisory Cadre and the Employer, fisrt and foremost.
Sharan, Kritarth Team
25 Sept 2018

Illegal termination.Will be set aside, with compensation by court.
Better revoke it.
There is procedure to followed to award major penalty like termination which needs to be followed.
Absence of this kind will not fall in the reasons to terminate services.
Col.Suresh Rathi

Dear Colleague,
This action of termination is patently illegal and is bound to boomrang as principles of natural justice are thrown to wind by immature and irresponsible action bereft of legal knowledge.
You immediately revoke the action of termination and follow the steps suggested by Shri Umakanthan Sir.
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR- Consultant

From the brief description you have given, it does not appear that you have any rule providing for drawing the presumption of automatic termination of lien. Even in such cases, there has to be a minimum semblance of observance of Principles of Natural Justice. Be it as it may be, if you are not in a position to heed the considered opinion expressed above to revoke the action, and you have to defend the matter in the court, then plead the fact of unauthorised absence and specifically submit to the court to be given an opportunity for proving the misconduct on merit. The absence could be proved by producing records along with the relevant witness. If you are able to establish the above facts try to justify the punishment.
What the company has done is known as "Discharge Simpliciter".
When a workman is absent for more than 10 days, and does not show any inclination to join duty,
the company need not wait endlessly for him to return to work and therefore can invoke "Discharge Simpliciter".
If challenged in court it may be set aside, unless the learned counsel of the Company can prove that the workman was holding the Company to ransom to get compensation for his termination.
Thank you,
R H Kavarana
HR Manager

Dear Mr.Kavarana,
I am not sure how come you hold this orders of termination by the employer is " discharge simpliciter"?
So far as I understand that if and only if the employer discharges the employee from service by giving notice or paying wages in lieu thereof as required under the terms of the contract of employment, such termination of employment would be discharge simpliciter.
The wording of the termination orders itself reveals the failure of complying with the contract of employment on the part of the employee by being unauthorisedly absent beyond the sanctioned leave. In other words this is a simple and straight orders of termination of employment signifying the imputation of the misconduct of unauthorized absence on the part of the delinquent. Thus, there is a stigma attached to the employee's exit by this orders. Therefore, no plausible argument of the employer before any Judicial Forum can prove this termination as a mere discharge simpliciter without any malafides.

Dear Jobfryou,
I am of the opinion that the termination order sent to the employee was a mistake. the action was unnecessary and impatient. there should have been some steps before you terminate an employee simply stating Unauthorised absence as the Reason.
There should have been notices sent to the said employee, a notice informing him about the enquiry that you are conducting to fathom his absence, the findings should have been communicated to him and his lack of response should have been recorded to categorize him as someone who is not interested in continuing with the job so the company has no option but to take some action that may include Termination.
This process should have given him a chance to explain himself and his situation. There are circumstances when doing other things is more important than informing the company about absence and we as HRs should understand that.
I think you should recall his termination.

I think, if there is a clause mentioned in the certified standing orders of the company, if he remains absent more than 8 days or absent continuously more than 8 days after authorised leave, he will lose lien on his employment and his services may be summarily terminated as per the clause. However, this type of situation is being handled by Management and Union bilaterally and solve amicably.

This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™