High Court
Case Details
WP(C) 1850/2006 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petition er seeks quashing of award dated 03.10.2005 passed by the learned Industrial Tri bunal, Dibrugarh in Reference Case No. 1/2003 holding the dismissal of the workm an from service to be justified. Further prayer made is for a direction to the r espondents to re-instate the workman in service. 2. The workman is represented by Assam Chah Mazdoor Sangha. The wor kman was a daily rated workman of Panitola Tea Estate belonging to respondent No . 1. Management had terminated the service of the workman w.e.f. 21.02.2001 on t he charge that the workman had misappropriated money and was involved in stealin g five bags of made black tea from the factory of the Tea Estate. The above term ination was on the basis of a domestic enquiry conducted by the Management. 3. Termination of service of the workman gave rise to an industrial dispute which ultimately led to making of a reference by the appropriate Govern ment to the Industrial Tribunal at Dibrugarh. The subject matter of reference wa s justification or otherwise of the dismissal of the workman from service and of his entitlement to reinstatement with full back wages. On behalf of the workman as well as on behalf of the Management, written statements were submitted. In t he reference proceeding, the learned Industrial Tribunal simultaneously consider ed validity of the domestic enquiry as well as dismissal of the workman on merit . The Management side examined six witnesses whereas the workman examined himsel f as the sole witness on his behalf.
Legal Reasoning
4. Learned Industrial Tribunal by the impugned award dated 03.10.20 05 held that the domestic enquiry was conducted in violation of the principles o f natural justice and as such the same was improper and invalid. However, on mer it, the learned Tribunal on perusal of the evidence adduced, came to the conclus ion that the workman was involved in the stealing and selling of five bags of ma de black tea from the godown of the Tea Estate belonging to the Management and t hus acted dishonestly. Holding that the charges against the workman stood proved , the learned Tribunal affirmed the dismissal of the workman from service and de clared that the workman was not entitled to any relief. 5. eking the above reliefs. Aggrieved, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition se
Legal Reasoning
6. Heard Mr. C. Baruah, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. P. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. N. Sarma, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Zahid, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. J. Handique, learned Government Advocate, Assam. 7. Mr. Baruah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when the Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the domestic enquiry con ducted against the workman was invalid being in violation of the principles of n atural justice, same ought to have been quashed and reinstatement of the workman ought to have been directed. He further submits that no request was made by the Management for examination of witnesses on its behalf to support dismissal of t he workman. In the absence of such request or permission being granted, learned Tribunal ought not to have adjudicated the issue of dismissal of the workman on merits. This has caused prejudice to the workman. In support of his submission, Mr. Baruah has placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of K arnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Lakshmidev Amma and Anr. reported in (2001) 5 SCC 433. 8. Per contra Mr. S. N. Sarma, learned senior counsel appearing for the Management submits that learned Tribunal was well within its jurisdiction t o simultaneously consider validity of the domestic enquiry as well as merit of d ismissal from service of the workman. A long line of judicial pronouncements sup port the course of action adopted by the learned Tribunal. He further submits th at since the learned Tribunal on the basis of evidence adduced had arrived at th e conclusion that the workman was involved in stealing and selling of tea from t he godown of the Tea Estate belonging to the Management, penalty of dismissal fr om service was justified and was rightly affirmed by the learned Tribunal. Accor ding to the learned senior counsel, quantum of misappropriation or degree of dis honesty is immaterial in matters of discipline, once misappropriation or dishone sty is proved. Since the workman had lost the confidence of the Management, ques tion of reinstatement does not arise. He has placed reliance on the following ju dgments: 1. gh). (1972) 1 SCC 595 (Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company Vs Ludh Budh Sin 2. 3. 4. 9.