LAWS(DLH)-2006-6-7

D T C Vs. ISHWAR SINGH

Decided On June 02, 2006
DTC Appellant
V/S
ISHWAR SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order the DTC assails an award dated 11th October, 1999 passed by the industrial adjudicator answering an fndustrial reference in favour of the workman. It appears that the respondent was appointed as a conducted with the DTC on 1st November, 1969. On allegations that the workman entered into some dispute with other employees of the DTC, he was charge sheeted by a charge sheet dated 31st October, 1996 and a disciplinary inquiry was conducted against him. Based on an inquiry report dated 28th April, 1987, the disciplinary authority issued a notice to show cause to the workman to show cause as to why he should not be removed from service. Finally, by an order dated 23rd July, 1987, the respondent was removed from service with effect from 14th July, 1987. The workman assailed the disciplinary proceedings taken against him as well as the order imposing the punishment in a statement of claim made before the conciliation officer. The appropriate government by an order dated 2rd March, 1989 referred the issue relating to the legality and justification of the dismissal of the respondent to the industrial adjudicatorand also the relief which he would be entitled to.

(2.) On the issue of fairness and propriety of the disciplinary proceedings conducted by the management, by an order dated 21st July, 1998 the industrial adjudicator held that the inquiry which was conducted was not fair or proper and granted an opportunity to the management to prove the misconduct attributed against the workman.

(3.) It is noteworthy that the order dated 21st July, 1998 vitiating the inquiry has not been impugned by the DTC either in the present writ petition or in any proceedings prior hitherto and has therefore did not attain finality. It is noteworthy that the DTC has not even bothered to place this order before the court. It is the workman who has placed reliance on the order and has filed the same on record alongwith his counter affidavit.