(1.) THE respondent before this Court was engaged in preparation and packaging of food for the various airlines, for being served to the flyers. One of the airlines for which packed food used to be prepared by the appellant was British Airways. The preparation and packaging of the food was undertaken in a bonded warehouse at the Airport. The case of the appellant is that on 19th July, 2000, when the respondent was leaving the premises after completing her duty, her hand bag was checked by a security guard. On checking the bag, some chocolates were found hidden in the umbrella which had been kept in a plastic bag. The chocolate found in the bag were meant for British Airways. The charges served upon the respondent having been denied by her, an inquiry into those charges was instituted by the appellant. The Inquiry Officer held the charges to be proved. The report of the Inquiry Officer was accepted by the Disciplinary Authority which imposed punishment of dismissal from her services upon the respondent. An industrial dispute having been raised by the respondent, a reference was made to the Labour Court to examine the dismissal of the respondent from service. The Labour Court, vide award dated 18th July, 2006, held that the charges against the respondent had been proved. The Labour Court, however, was of the view that to dismiss an employee for having committed theft of this nature was shockingly disproportionate and was not justified. He accordingly directed the appellant to impose another punishment short of dismissal of service, proportionate to the misconduct committed by the respondent, which may not necessarily mean taking her bag on duty. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the appellant vide order dated 5th March, 2007 imposed penalty of discharge with notice upon the respondent and paid her one month salary as notice pay. The revised penalty, however, was not challenged by the respondent.
(2.) AGGRIEVED from the award of the Labour Court, the respondent filed W.P.(C) 4433/2007, the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 5th March, 2012 set aside the award and directed reinstatement of the respondent with 40% backwages. Being aggrieved from the said order dated 5th March, 2012, the appellant is before us by way of this appeal.
(3.) DURING the course of the inquiry, the appellant examined three witnesses namely, the Security Guard Shri Vinay Kumar Sharma, Security Supervisor Shri R.S.Yadav and Chief Secretary Officer Shri L.K.Mathew. The Security Guard Mr. Vinay Kumar Sharma stated in his deposition that when he asked the petitioner to show her bag to him, she told him that she was having chocolates in her bag, which she was taking home for her children. According to him when he insisted upon checking the bag, the respondent stated that this would result in her insult in the presence of others. According to him, when he searched the bag, the chocolates of British Airways were found hidden inside the umbrella which had been kept in the bag. The respondent examined herself as a witness and refuted the charges against her.