Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has recently observed that transgression of freedom of speech beyond reasonableness can lead to disastrous consequences. 

"Similarly, clause 24(1) clearly covers the act of Respondent workman for having posted the two Facebook posts. Freedom of speech and expression cannot be allowed to be transgressed beyond reasonableness. If that is allowed, it could lead to disastrous consequences. In a given case, one cannot and should not wait for the consequences to occur. Such acts itself are required to be nipped in the bud," the court said. 

The single-judge bench of the high court, comprising Justice Milind Jadhav, was hearing an appeal filed by a company against the order of the Labour Court that held that the chargesheet against the workman was illegal. 

The chargesheet was filed against the workman for uploading two Facebook posts against the company that were allegedly violent.

The Pune-based company filed an appeal before the high court against the order of the labour court. 

In the two posts, the workman, who was the office bearer of the trade union, had stated that the management was not paying heed towards the state of workman and that if the workman takes the actions of the management personally, they would teach a lesson to the management.

Senior Advocate Nitin Bapat, appearing for the company, contended that the Labour Court committed an error while holding that the misconduct committed by the workman had no remote connection with the working of the company when admittedly, at the time, hectic negotiations for arriving at a wage settlement and change in service conditions were actively deliberated and discussed for some months between the company and the recognized union.

Advocate Nitin Kulkarni, appearing for the workman, contended that assuming that the two Facebook posts were posted by the workman, the same were admittedly posted from outside the premises of the company.

Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be construed that the workman committed an act subversive of discipline or good behavior on the premises of the establishment of the company for the applicability of clauses 24(d), 24(k), and 24(1) of the Model Standing Orders.

The high court's order noted that access to Facebook account is more conveniently accessed through the mobile phone

"In today's technologically advanced world mobile phone is carried 24X7 by every person. Access to Facebook account is more conveniently accessed through the mobile phone. In that view of the matter, submissions made by the Respondent - workman that for posting the Facebook posts, Respondent workman did not have a computer nor he was on the premises of the establishment is not proved and therefore the contention that Respondent exonerated cannot be accepted," the order states.

The high court quashed the order passed by the labour court with respect to inquiry that was conducted and upheld the termination of worker.

Case title: Hitachi Astemo Fie Pvt. Ltd. Vs Nirajkumar Prabhakarrao Kadu