UNITED PHOSPHOROUS LTD Vs. PRESIDING MEMBER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Judgment and Award passed by the learned Labour Court, Bharuch in reference LCB No.376 of 1998, dtd. 26/4/2005, whereby, Petitioner has been directed to reinstate the Respondent No.2 with 20% Back Wages.

(2.) The facts needed to be discussed for the disposal of the case is that:

(3.) Heard learned Advocate Ms. Nancy Soni for M/s Trivedi and Gupta and though appearance of the Respondents were filed, no one has remained present and the time of hearing. Learned Advocate Ms. Nancy Soni submits that the legality and validity of the departmental proceedings were not disputed by the learned Labour Court however, the learned labour Court has held that Petitioner though remained on unauthorized leave but as there were leave in his account, therefore, the punishment which was imposed is disproportionate. Learned Advocate Ms. Nancy Soni submits that after full fledged inquiry and providing sufficient opportunity the inquiry concluded resulting into dismissal order and thereafter, after lump sum composition was also paid towards full and final settlement which was also accepted thereafter it was not open for the Respondent to challenge the order of dismissal before learned Labour Court on the ground of disproportionate punishment. Learned Advocate Ms. Nancy Soni relies on Rule 13(2) of the Bombay Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rule, 1959 and submitted that Workman who desires to obtain leave of absence shall apply in writing to the superior or any Officer appointed for the purpose by the Company. In the event of non intimation, the departmental inquiry was rightly initiated and was concluded in the dismissal order. Learned Advocate Ms. Nancy Soni submits that previously also for the same charge departmental proceedings were initiated and with a view to provide one opportunity the said departmental culminated onto one day Suspension order. Thereafter also, there was no improvement in the conduct or attendance of the Respondent No.2. In that background the Order passed by the learned Labour Court requires to be set aside and the punishment imposed in the departmental proceedings is required to be upheld.