ANAND NAGARPALIKA Vs. VASANTBHAI P KHRISTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the petitions are preferred from the same award dated 4. 9. 1997 of Labour Court, Anand, whereby the workman has been ordered to be reinstated without back wages. None present for the employer, even as special notice upon elevation of its advocate, is issued and served. Learned counsel, Mr. Bhavin Satvara appearing with learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Y. S. Lakhani submitted that the petitioner was required to be allowed some back wages in the facts of the case.

(2.) IT appears from record and the impugned award that the workman has been dismissed from service after holding a departmental enquiry into charges related to misbehaviour in a drunken condition with his superior on 3. 5. 1986. The Labour Court found that finding regarding the workman being in a drunken condition was not supported by any evidence and the finding of the enquiry officer was not upheld. However, misbehaviour and the misconduct of disobeying the order of the superior were believed and the finding of the enquiry officer in that regard was upheld. In view of the surrounding circumstances and seriousness of the misconduct held to have been proved the Labour Court considered it inappropriate to deprive the workman of his livelihood. Therefore, in exercise of its powers under Section 11-A, the Labour Court made the award, as aforesaid, ordering reinstatement of the workman and denying the back wages.

(3.) ALTHOUGH both the parties to the adjudication appear to be aggrieved by the award, and no one is present for the employer, Anand Nagar Palika, the impugned award and order appears to be eminently just and made in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Labour Court, and any interference of this Court in exercise of Article 226 of the Constitution would not be justified. Therefore, both the petitions are dismissed and Rule in each is discharged with no order as to costs.