CORPORATION v. VK THAKARDA C

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE H.L.GOKHALE Date of decision: 30/09/98 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Heard Mr.Rawal for the petitioner and Mr.Rathod for the Respondent. RULE is made returnable forthwith. Both the learned advocates have made their submissions.

2.(cid:9)The respondent was working as an Artisan 'A' Mechanic in Petlad Depot in the district of Kheda. He remained absent from 25.11.1988 to 18.5.1989. After an enquiry, he was found to be guilty and ordered to be (cid:9) dismissed. The learned Judge of the Labour Court held that his misconduct was proved, but came to the conclusion that a leniency is required to be shown and under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 directed reinstatement with continuity and 30% of the backwages and stoppage of one increment permanently.

3.(cid:9)Mr.Rawal appearing for the petitioner submits that the past record of the employee is not good. There are in all eleven defaults, out of which two are regarding absence. But then, those are for absence of nine and two days. The fact, however, remains that there are other defaults and, where the misconduct is proved, there is no reason why the employee should be granted backwages. In the circumstances, the award of backwages is interfered and set aside though the other part of the award granting reinstatement with continuity and with stoppage of one increment with permanent effect will remain. Rule is accordingly made absolute.

4.(cid:9)The impugned order is dated 25.2.1997. It was published on 30.5.1997 and became enforceable on

30.6.1997. The petition is filed on 30.4.1998. The respondent workman will be permitted to join duty by

15.10.1998 and the arrears from the date on which the award became enforceable will be paid to him by the end of November 1998. The amount payable to the respondent will be recovered from the salary of the officers concerned inasmuch as it is sheerly because of their negligence that this amount is required to be paid to the respondent workman. (KMG Thilake) $$$$$$$$$