S. KABALI Vs. CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER, BMTC, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to the Award as at Annexure-A of the Labour Court, Bangalore. The petitioner was a Conductor in BMTC. While he was on duty on 04.11.1996, the bus was checked by the checking squad. Misconduct having been noticed and a report submitted, Disciplinary Authority served Articles of Charge dated 11.11.1996. Disciplinary enquiry having followed, petitioner was imposed with the punishment of removal from service of the BMTC by an order dated 20.11.1998. A dispute having been raised long thereafter, a reference was made by the Government in exercise of the power under Sec. 10(1)(c) & (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the Act) to the Labour Court and the case was registered in Ref. No. 19/2014. Claim statement and counter statement having been filed by the parties and evidence adduced by both sides, a preliminary issue raised with regard to raising the dispute after long lapse of time was answered in the negative. Labour Court having found that the dispute was raised after 14 years from the date of imposition of punishment, finding that the dispute is stale, as the workman failed to establish the delay and laches, Award dated 28.02.2015 was passed and the reference was answered in negative.

(2.) Sri. M.C. Basavaraju, learned advocate contended that the Labour Court has committed error and illegality in taking note of the past history of the workman to have committed 40 misconducts. Learned counsel submitted that even though some of the Conductors working in the BMTC are involved in more than 200 serious default cases, no action was taken and discriminatory treatment was meted out to the petitioner and that the Labour Court has failed to appreciate the case properly. Learned counsel submitted that the Labour Court is unjustified in denying relief to the workman merely on account of the delay. He submitted that the appeal filed before the Appellate Authority having not been considered till April, 2003 and the petitioner having met with an accident and completely bed ridden, filed MVC No. 5074/2003 in the MACT, Bangalore and after recovery, raised the dispute : on 10.05.2013. Learned counsel submitted that there is failure on the part of the Labour Court in not taking the said aspects into consideration and as such it has committed error and illegality' in holding the dispute as stale and not entitling the workman to any relief. Alternatively, learned counsel contended that there is failure on the part of the Labour Court in not exercising its power under Sec. 11-A of the Act.

(3.) Sri. Hareesh Bhandary, learned advocate for the respondent on the other hand by taking me through the record of the case submitted that there being no denial of the fact that the petitioner has past history of having committed 40 misconducts and the punishment order dated 11.11.1996 having not been questioned in an appeal and the dispute having been raised during 2013, there being inordinate delay, Labour Court is justified in passing the order, rejecting the reference.