This follows the Federal Court’s refusal to grant the government leave to appeal the ruling.

Announcing the unanimous decision of the apex court, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Rahman Sebli said there was no merit to any of the five legal questions posed by the government to obtain leave to appeal.

The panel, which included Justices Nordin Hassan and Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil, did not make any order on costs.

To secure leave, an applicant must demonstrate that the proposed appeal raises novel legal or constitutional questions of public importance that have not been previously addressed and require further arguments.

In a written judgment two months ago, Justice Lee Swee Seng said that amendments to the Industrial Relations Act 1967 which came into force on Jan 1, 2021 vested no discretion in the DGIR to decide whether to refer a dispute.

This includes a situation where an employee has rejected an employer’s offer of reinstatement with full payment of back wages.

Lee said a dispute is not settled until and unless both parties arrive at an agreement on the terms of settlement during the mediation process.

“Until there is a concluded agreement as in a consensus ad idem in a settlement that is recorded and signed by both the dismissed workman and his employer, there is just no settlement,” the judge said in his written judgment.

S Shankarkumar had sought a judicial review of the DGIR’s refusal to refer his case to the Industrial Court following representations over his dismissal from employment with Malayan Adjustment Company Sdn Bhd.

The DGIR refused to refer the case after the company agreed to reinstate Shankarkumar to his post as senior adjuster and pay him back wages during the conciliation process after he was summarily sacked without a domestic inquiry in 2021.

The employee rejected the offer as he could not agree to the terms of reinstatement, which did not include an apology or admission of liability by the company and required him to report directly to the managing director.

Shankarkumar claimed the company was not sincere and genuine in its offer, especially since it had initially rejected his request for reinstatement.

Last year, he successfully applied for a judicial review at the High Court seeking an order of certiorari to quash the DGIR’s decision and an order of mandamus to compel the referral of his case to the Industrial Court.

Lawyer Ranjan N Chandran said following today’s ruling by the apex court, Shankarkumar’s unfair dismissal case would have to be heard and adjudicated upon by the Industrial Court.

Counsel VK Raj, Muthuveramani Nadesan and Jayasri Nadarajan also acted for Shankarkumar while senior federal counsel Isa Mohamed and federal counsel Jeevitha Raja appeared for the DGIR.