GIRISH P A Vs. MANAGEMENT OF BPL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated September 23, 2006 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore in Serial Application No. 1/2000 and 24/2000 produced at Annexure-'M'.

(2.) Brief facts leading to this case are that, the respondent management runs 12 units in and around Bangalore and all the employees of the 12 units are represented by one union. The said union placed charter of demands before the management. When the matter was pending before the Conciliation Officer in connection with the charter of demands, an unwanted incident of burning of bus carrying the employees of the respondent industry took place and in the said incident, two employees succumbed to the injury on March 25, 1999 at Madiwala. In this regard, the police registered a criminal case showing these petitioners as accused Nos. 29 and 30. The respondent management in view of the charge-sheet having been filed against the petitioners and others dismissed the petitioners and others without holding any enquiry and thereafter management filed an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), inter alia seeking permission of approval of the order of dismissal. The said application was contested by the petitioners on the ground that, order of dismissal is not proceeded by an enquiry nor the petitioners had any notice and they were not involved in the alleged crime nor the incident has taken place in the factory premises. Further, the quarrel was not between one workman and workman in another unit, and is not misconduct. The workmen travelling in the company bus were not belonging to the unit in which the petitioners were working. Further, there is no iota of evidence to show that, these petitioners were involved in the said crime and also stated that, petitioners have been honourably acquitted by the Sessions Judge. Bangalore City, in S.C. No. 51/2000 dated October 13, 2003. It is also alleged that, the alleged eye-witness has not supported the case of the management.

(3.) The Industrial Tribunal considering the evidence led by the parties and on the preponderance of probabilities prima facie held that, the petitioners are guilty of misconduct and approved the order of punishment by its order dated September 23, 2006.