VEDEHI TIWARI Vs. SHAYMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal the appellant, who is widow of deceased employee, has challenged the impugned order dated 22.8.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the order dated 26.8.2011 passed by the Industrial Court, Bench at Bilaspur, in Appeal No.9/CGIR Act/A-II/2011 and the order of reinstatement dated 14.03.2011 passed by the Labour Court in Case No.2/CGIR Act/2010 have been set aside and the matter has been remanded back to the Labour Court to decide the case afresh on merits.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that deceased Devi Deen Tiwari was engaged on muster-roll by respondent No.1 in the year 1997. Looking to his past engagement as muster-roll employee, services of said Devi Deen were regularized as 'Plant Attendant Grade-III'. After regularization, said Devi Deen submitted his Class 8th mark sheet wherein his date of birth was mentioned and accordingly the same was recorded in the service record. Said Devi Deen continued in service and had performed his duties till 14.1.2010 when he was terminated from services on the basis of one complaint received by the respondent establishment on 10.8.2009. The complaint was to the effect that said Devi Deen got mentioned his wrong date of birth in the service record on the strength of fake & forged documents. On receipt of such complaint, said Devi Deen was served with the notice dated 11.12.2009 titled as 'charge sheet' [1] (Annexure P-6 to the writ petition). Subsequently, on the basis of some enquiry report the order of termination has been passed by way of punishment.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved by the order of termination, said Devi Deen filed an application under Sec. 31 (3) of the CG Industrial Relations Act, 1960 before the Labour Court. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Labour Court framed various issues including a preliminary issue with respect to legality and validity of holding of departmental enquiry. The Labour Court has also framed an issue 'whether termination order dated 14.1.2010 is liable to be declared illegal?