MANAGEMENT OF A A 217 VELLAKOIL PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the award passed by the Labour Court reinstating the second respondent S. Gunasekaran is being challenged. At the relevant time, i.e., in the year 1983, Gunasekaran was working as a clerk. He was suspended by an order, dated November 9, 1983 and on December 3, 1983, a charge memo was said to be served on him. However, according to the management, he refused to take the charge memo as well as the suspension order. Ultimately, he came to be dismissed. The said Gunasekaran, therefore, raised a dispute under Section 2-A of the Industrial disputes Act and the management offered to substantiate the dismissal by proving all the charges which were framed before the Labour court itself.

(2.) THE case of the second respondent before the Labour Court was that in fact there was no charge memo given and no domestic enquiry ever had been held against him. As against this, the management pleaded before the Labour Court that the workman had declined to receive the order of suspension, dated November 9, 1983, and that he had also failed to receive the charge memo. Since the workman did not hand over the charge, the charge memo was published in the newspaper and it was only thereafter the workman handed over the charge on December 5, 1983 and remitted the sale amount of Rs. 2,594. 76. The management pleaded that the Board passed a resolution and directed the sub-committee to initiate action against the workman and it was on the basis of the suggestion of the sub-committee, the workman was removed from service with effect from February 28, 1984. As has been mentioned earlier, since the management offered to prove the misconduct on the seven charges framed against the workman, the matter was thereafter examined by the Labour Court and the labour Court came to the conclusion that none of the charges could be said to have been proved. The seven charges were: