MANAGEMENT OF HAMDARD WAQF LABORATORY Vs. RAUNAQ HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the LettersPatent by the Management of Hamdard (Waqf) Laboratories, Delhi, isdirected against the judgment of the learned Single Judge whereby thewrit petition filed by the appellant against Raunaq Hussain respondentNo. 1, Hamdard Dawakhana Employees Union respondent No. 2 andthe Presiding Officer, Additional Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, respondentNo. 3 (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), for quashing the awardof the Tribunal was dismissed.

(2.) Raunaq Hussain respondent joined the service of Hamdard (Waqf)Laboratories, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Dawakhana) at Delhiin 1953. By an order of the Divisional Manager Administration of theDawakhana dated June 30, 1966 Raunaq Hussain was transferred witheffect from 5/07/1966 to Hamdard Dawakhana, Hyderabad, and "isdirected to join the new post by 11/07/1966. Raunaq Hussain maderepresentation against the proposed transfer but the representation wasrejected. Raunaq Hussain who did not go to Hyderabad was chargedsheeted on 21/07/1966 for having disobeyed reasonable orders. Assuch. he was stated to be guilty of misconduct as defined in Para 15 ofthe Standing Orders. The explanation furnished by Raunaq Hussainwas found to be unsatisfactory and the matter was referred to the EnquiryOfficer who made a report on 26/09/1966 that Raunaq Hussainhad disobeyed a lawful and reasonable order of the management andas such his disobedience amounted to misconduct. On 30/08/1966 Raunaq Hussain was served with two more charge-sheets. Undercharge No. 1 Raunaq Hussain was asked to show cause why he shouldnot be dismissed from service of the Dawakhaiia because of his absencesince 24/07/1966. The second charge related to the refusal ofRaunaq Hussain to receive a letter from the Establishment Officercharging him of the misconduct of remaining absent without leave witheffect from 24/07/1966. The above charges were described byRaunaq Hussain to be wrong and baseless in his explanation. Thesecharges were also referred to the Enquiry Officer who. as per reportdated 30/09/1966, held Raunaq Hussain guilty of both thecharges. The management of the Dawakhana, on the basis of the tworeports of the Enquiry Officer, dismissed Raunaq Hussain by its orderdated November 10/14, 1966.

(3.) Meanwhile, before the passing of the order of dismissal, themanagement passed an order on 28/10/1966 transferring RaunaqHussain to Ghaziabad. K was stated in that order that during enquiryproceedings Raunaq Hussain had agreed to be transferred to Ghazlabad.This order of transfer to Ghaziabad was not carried out byRaunaq Hussain and he questioned the validity of the same.