Bharti Airtel Limited Vs A.S. Raghavendra (Supreme Court of India)
Repspondent had joined the company on 22.06.2009 as Regional Business Head (South) – Government Enterprise Services in the grade of Senior Manager (B2)-Sales, with an annual package of Rs.22,00,000 comprising fixed pay and variable pay under the Sales Incentive Plan. He headed a team consisting of four Account Managers covering Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Kerala. He resigned in March 2011, and his resignation was accepted in May 2011. He subsequently received full and final settlement of his claims.
Read SC Jugment on Review Petition in this case: SC Dismisses Review Petition as Review Cannot Be Used as an Appeal in Disguise
Nearly nineteen months later, the respondent initiated proceedings alleging that his resignation had been forced. Following failed conciliation proceedings, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court. The Labour Court, after considering pleadings and evidence from both sides, held that the respondent had failed to establish that he was a “workman” and concluded that he had performed managerial functions. The reference was accordingly rejected.
The High Court’s Single Judge later set aside the Labour Court’s award, holding that the respondent was a “workman” because he lacked powers to appoint, dismiss, or conduct disciplinary proceedings against other employees. The Division Bench upheld this view.
