As per the case facts the appellant M s Bharti Airtel Limited appealed a High Court judgment that affirmed a lower court's decision which had partly allowed the respondent's writ ... petition The respondent appointed as a Regional Business Head had resigned leading to a dispute over whether his resignation was forced and if he qualified as a workman under Section s of the Industrial Disputes Act ID Act The appeal to the Supreme Court aimed to determine if the respondent was indeed a workman and if the Labour Court had proper jurisdiction to hear the case The question arose whether the respondent considering the nature of his duties as a Regional Business Head fell within the definition of a workman under Section s of the Industrial Disputes Act thereby making his claim before the Labour Court against the appellant permissible Finally the Supreme Court allowed the appeal setting aside the High Court's judgments and restoring the Labour Court's decision The Court declared that the respondent was not a workman under the ID Act concluding that his reference to the Labour Court against the appellant was therefore not maintainable The Court found his resignation to be a personal choice rather than a result of arbitrary employer actions