DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER Vs. LABOUR COURT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Paritosh Calla waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No. 1 and learned advocate Mr. RC. Chaudhari waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 2.1 to 2.4.

(2.) The workman had invoked the jurisdiction of Labour Court challenging his dismissal from service and seeking relief of reinstatement with backwages. Statement of Claim was filed at Exh. 4, to which a reply came to be filed by the first party employer. However, during the pendency of the reference proceedings, the second party-workman expired and his heirs and legal representatives came to be impleaded under Exh. 18 application.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Gautam Joshi submitted that the misconduct committed by the workman was serious and the same was proved. It was submitted that the Labour Court was not justified in showing sympathy and that it could not have taken a lenient view by giving back-wages and consequential benefits. According to his submission, the penalty of dismissal was a proper and proportionate and would have been imposed, had the workman not died. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. P.C. Chaudhari for the respondent-workman submitted that the workman had put in long service, that there was no past misconducts shown and since the workman died during the pendency of the reference, the relief of 25% backwages and consequential benefits granted was not liable to be interfered with.