GANDHI LABOUR INSTITUTE Vs. VITHALBHAI DAYABHAI KATARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD, Shri Nandish Chudgar, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Shri T. R. Mishra, learned Counsel for the respondent. The employer, being aggrieved by the award dated 12-12-2000 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ahmedabad, [in Reference (LCA) No. 12/97 (old) Reference (LCA) No. 248/98] is before this Court with a submission that the findings recorded by the learned Labour Court are perverse and consequently the award deserves to be quashed.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that the respondent workman was employed as a peon with the petitioner-establishment; the establishment wanted to employ some persons as Clerks, therefore, they had invited certain applications. Fifteen persons were taken into zone of consideration after shortlisting, there was a direction to the respondent to send interview calls to each of the 15 persons by post. The allegations are that instead of mailing the post, the workman went to the houses of those candidates, informed them that the workman-respondent was to sit in the interview and if an amount of Rs. 50 was paid to him, he would see that such person was appointed. When some of the candidates appeared in the interview, they found that the present respondent was not in the panel of the interview committee,, Therefore, they made inquiries. On getting suspicious, the petitioner establishment made certain inquiries, they found that the workman had committed misconduct by collecting money and by making impersonation. Charge-sheet was issued to the workman but however, in absence of supply of documents etc. the workman did not take part in the inquiry, the inquiries culminate into the guilt of the non-applicant workman and he was ordered to be sacked. Being aggrieved by the said order of termination, the workman came to the Labour Court. The Labour Court, after recording evidence came to a conclusion that the inquiry was vitiated being in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Labour Court, however, granted opportunity to the present petitioner to substantiate the allegations of misconduct and provided opportunity to the parties to lead evidence.

(3.) THE workman stated on oath that he did not meet any of the person and he was* sought to be framed for the reasons best known to the officers of the establishment/the establishment examined its officers to prove that during the course of the investigations, they had recorded statements of some of the witnesses, officers and produced those statements in the Court and proved the same. The establishment also examined one Faisal Shaikh who appeared in the Court and stated that the respondent-workman had come to his place and demanded money. The petitioner also examined one laxmiben, mother of one Magari Dulera. The said Laxmiben stated in the Court that some of the officers had come to his place to record his statement. The learned Labour Court, after appreciating the evidence came to a conclusion that statements of Faisal Shaikh and Laxmiben were falling short in bringing the guilt home. It held, that the department failed in proving the misconduct, it accordingly allowed the Reference and directed reinstatement with 20% back-wages.