DABUR INDIA LTD. Vs. RASPINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed assailing the judgment and award dated 26.12.2012, passed by Labour Court, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar whereby dismissal of the respondent/workman dated 07.03.2006 was held to be illegal and Respondent/workman was directed to be reinstated alongwith entire back-wages and all consequential reliefs. Learned Labour Court has further directed to pay Rs. 2000/- towards cost and legal expenses to the respondent/workman.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that respondent/workman was working as Junior Mechanic, however, was promoted as Mechanic (Grade-VIII), w.e.f. 18.04.2005. On 25.09.2005, respondent/workman was caught carrying with him five bottles of Amla Oil and one bottle of 200 m.l. Laal Tel stolen from the factory; theft was informed telephonically to the Factory Manager, Mr. Uttam Singh Matela on 25.09.2005 itself; respondent/workman was placed under suspension on 26.09.2005 for the alleged theft; respondent /workman came to the factory on 28.09.2005 and confessed his guilt in his own handwriting and tendered his apology saying that he would not repeat the same offence in future; respondent/workman was charge-sheeted on 15.10.2005, calling him to furnish his explanation to the charges; respondent/workman submitted his reply to the charges on 05.11.2005; after receiving the report of the Inquiry Officer, show cause notice was issued to the respondent/workman on 25.01.2006, as to why, he should not be dismissed from the services and thereafter, order was passed on 07.03.2006, dismissing the workman/respondent from the services; on the request of workman/respondent, reference was made by the Labour Court, as to whether dismissal of the workman vide order dated 07.03.2006 was valid and justified and if not, what relief workman is entitled for; vide impugned award dated 26.12.2012, learned Labour Court was pleased to hold that dismissal of the workman vide order dated 07.03.2006 was not valid and justified and was further pleased to direct reinstatement of the workman alongwith all consequential benefits and backwages. Learned Labour Court was further pleased to direct the employer to pay Rs. 2000/- towards cost and legal expenses to the workman/respondent. Feeling aggrieved, employer/petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

(3.) I have heard Mr. S. N. Babulkar, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Ravi Babuldar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Aditya Kumar Arya, learned counsel for the respondent and have carefully perused the record.