MAHAVIR GENERAL HOSPITAL Vs. SAMIR NATWARLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, being aggrieved by the award dated 26th February, 1998 passed by the learned Labour Court, Surat in Reference (LCS) No.298 of 1985, directing reinstatement of the respondent to his original post with full back-wages and all consequential benefits with costs of Rs.500/-, is before this Court with a submission that the learned Labour Court acted illegally in directing the reinstatement.

(2.) The shorts facts necessary for disposal of the present Writ Application are that the respondent-workman remained absent from his duties and on being asked to report back, he applied for special/privilege leave. The prayer was rejected on the ground that he had no balance leaves in his favour. Thereafter, a charge-sheet was issued to the workman, the Inquiry Officer recorded that the workman had admitted the guilt before him and he, accordingly, referred the matter to the disciplinary authority. When the second notice to show cause was issued, the workman made a candid statement that he did never admit his guilt and records of the inquiry proceedings were incorrect. Despite this allegation, the disciplinary authority did not hold any further inquiry, but, relied upon the statement of the Inquiry Officer and directed discharge of the workman from the services. Thereafter, the matter came to the learned Labour Court. The learned Labour Court recorded the findings that the inquiry was absolutely illegal. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petitioner came to this Court in Special Civil Application No.1192 of 1992, but, the said petition was dismissed on 25th February, 1992 with a clarification that if the matter is finally adjudicated against the interest of the petitioner, it would be at liberty to raise the points raised in the said petition. The learned Labour Court, after recording the evidence and hearing the parties, issued directions in favour of the respondent-workman. The petitioner-Establishment is again before this Court.

(3.) Shri Prabhav Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the learned Court below was absolutely unjustified in directing reinstatement with full back-wages and other consequential benefits, though the respondent had categorically admitted the wrong committed by him.