B D SHETTY Vs. CEAT LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The question whether the 'delay' in completion of disciplinary proceedings directly attributable to the conduct of a workman under Section 10-A(1)(b) of Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 also covers delay occasioned on account of such workman succeeding in getting stay of disciplinary proceedings at the hands of competent judicial authority pending trial of a criminal case in a bona fide effort to protect him from the prejudice that may be caused by simultaneous proceedings has come up for consideration and decision in this appeal.

(3.) In brief, the facts giving rise to this appeal are : The appellants are employees of the respondent -company. They resigned from the membership of the Mumbai Shramik Sangh Union, which till then had been the only trade union in the respondent-company and accepted membership of Shramik Utkarsha Sabha. One Mr. Sayeed Ahmed, an employee of respondent and Vide-President of Mumbai Sharamik Sangh made a false complaint on 23-4-1996 on account of Union rivalry against the appellant alleging that they had assaulted him; they were arrested and subsequently released on bail; on 8-5-1996, suspension orders were issued to the appellants on account of criminal cases; the appellants replied to the order of suspension deying allegations made against them. On 7-10-1996, the respondent issued charge-sheets to the appellants alleging misconduct under the Model Standing Orders 24(K) and 24(I); the appellants gave replies to the charge-sheets denying the allegations; the domestic inquiry commenced on 25-1-1997; the appellants requested the respondent as well as Inquiry Officer not to proceed with the domestic inquiry till the conclusion of criminal trial pending before the Sessions Court; since the said request was not accepted, the appellants filed complaints before the Labour Court, Thane under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (for short the MRTU and PULP Act). In the said complaint cases, the Labour Court granted interim order on 23-7-1997 staying the domestic inquiry. In the final order passed on 11-12-1997, the Labour Court confirmed the said interim order restraining the respondent from conducting the domestic inquiry till the completion of the criminal trial. Against this order, the respondent has filed Revision Application (ULP) Nos. 34, 35 and 36 of 1998 before the Industrial Tribunal, Thane, which are pending.