M/S. MEDOPHARM Vs. MR. B.V. SAMPANGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 18.10.2016 passed in Reference No.7/2013.

(2.) The petitioner having taken action against the respondent for certain misconduct had filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('I.D. Act' for short) seeking approval of the action. The same was registered in Serial Application No.1/2005 and the Labour Court having considered the aspect relating to the fairness of the Domestic enquiry and also the merits of the rival contentions had passed the order dated 09.05.2012 approving the action of the petitioner - Company. However, on such dismissal order dated 10.01.2004 being approved by the Labour Court and the respondent herein being aggrieved by such action of the employer, had raised a dispute under Section 10 of the I.D. Act against said dismissal which is pending before the Second Additional Labour Court in Reference No.7/2013. In the said proceedings, the petitioner - Management had filed the application seeking that the maintainability of the proceedings be considered as a preliminary issue, as a reconsideration on the validity of the domestic enquiry and on merits would amount to res judicata. It is in that light since the application in I.A. No.4 had been filed with regard to the consideration of the preliminary issue, the order dated 18.10.2016 is passed on the said issue. The Labour Court has in that regard arrived at the conclusion that the findings given by the Labour Court in Serial Application No.1/2005 wherein the approval had been granted in the proceedings under Section 33(2)(b) of the I.D. Act will not attract the principles of res judicata in the dispute raised under Section 10 of the I.D. Act by the respondent. The petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by the same is before this Court.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the petition papers.