N HARISH GOWDA Vs. MANAGEMENT OF BOSCH LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the workman calling in question the award dated 02nd April 2013 of the III Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, rejecting I.D. No. 42/2008 and confirming the order dated 21.07.2008 passed by the respondent dismissing the petitioner from service for proved acts of misconduct. The only submission of the learned Counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner was suffering from mental disorder and was under treatment from the year 2001 onwards and in such a circumstance, being provoked, on 14.10.2006, consequent upon an argument with the co-worker in the canteen of the respondent management, a scuffle took place whence he used the kitchen knife and assaulted his fellow workman, nevertheless had no idea of what he was doing. Learned Counsel further submits that extensive treatment for mental disorder at Abhaya hospital led to a certificate stating that petitioner was mentally suitable and there was no more paranoid schizophrenia and therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in being apprehensive of directing reinstatement.

(2.) If regard is had to the fact that petitioner was under treatment for paranoid schizophrenia at Abhaya Hospital, then it cannot be said that on 14.10.2006, the use of the kitchen knife to assault his co-worker was a result of the mental illness. The evidence discloses that the kitchen knife fortunately was blunt and saved the life of the co-worker by name G. Harikrishna. The fact that petitioner made use of a kitchen knife to attack his co-worker is a clear pointer to the petitioner's frame of mind. It is needless to state that the conduct of the petitioner is not an acceptable one, more appropriately while in the company of coworkers and that too when employed in the canteen where there exists a kitchen. If the petitioner is not a social being and his mental faculties have been distorted, certainly is not a person who could be continued in the service of the respondent management engaging thousands of workers/employees. In my considered opinion, the Labour Court was fully justified in recording a finding that petitioner was not fit to be re-instated into service. No exception can be taken to the reasons, findings and conclusion arrived at by the Labour Court, calling for interference. Petition is dismissed.