V AZHAGIRI Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT SALEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Superintending Engineer, Mettur Electricity Distribution Circle, the petitioner herein, laid the present Writ Petition challenging the correctness of the award dated 30.12.2003, passed by the Labour Court in I.D.No.48 of 1993 and to quash the same as illegal, without jurisdiction on the ground that the 2nd respondent/workman (in W.P.No.21921 of 2004) was directed to be reinstated in the service of the petitioner's Electricity Board with continuity of service but without backwages holding that the order of removal of the 2nd respondent from service was not commensurate with the charges proved against him, while the workman has challenged the portion of the award whereby his claim for backwages has been negatived.

(2.) The 2nd respondent/workman (in W.P.No.21921 of 2004) joined in the services of the petitioner's Electricity Board as Assessor (Card Billing Staff) in Muthukapatti Section. It was found that during the period January 1982 and June 1983, he was alleged to have committed certain grave irregularities by not properly maintaining the accounts pertaining to collection of current consumption charges which were collected from the electricity consumers and, subsequently, is said to have misappropriated the Board's funds to a sum of Rs.3,901.50/-. On that account, a disciplinary proceedings was initiated against the 2nd respondent/wokman (in W.P.No.21921 of 2004) by framing three charges. A show cause notice was issued calling upon the workman to submit his explanation to the three charges levelled against him. But, after receiving the show cause notice, the 2nd respondent/workman refused to submit his explanation.

(3.) However, in order to give him a further opportunity, an Enquiry Officer was appointed by the petitioner Electricity Board in Memo dated 28.10.1983 and after giving due opportunity during the enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report together with his findings holding that the charges levelled against the workman were duly proved. After submission of the report, 2nd show cause notice dated 02.08.1986 was also issued asking the workman to show cause as to why he should not be removed from service.