V. ROBIN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, PRINCIPAL LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the order of the Industrial Tribunal made in I.D.No.29 of 2003 dtd. 25/3/2011 insofar as the negatived the claim for reinstatement in service with continuity of service and back wages and other consequential benefits.

(2.) Heard Mr.S.Kumarasamy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jayaraman learned counsel for the second respondent.

(3.) Mr.S.Kumarasamy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he had joined the services of the second respondent on 22/7/1997. On 12/12/2005, he was placed under suspension and on 31/12/2005, a charge memo was issued to him relating to incident which had taken place on 2/12/2005, 6/12/2005, 7/12/2005 and 12/12/2005. According to him, the entire disciplinary proceedings was victimization as the petitioner was elected as an Office Bearer on the formation of an Union to espouse the cause of the workman in the second respondent Union. The said Union, according to him, came into being on 11/12/2005 and the order of suspension was issued on 12/12/2005. He would submit that the entire charge memo has been only targeted against him even though the President of the Union had also allegedly taken part in the imputations which were made against the petitioner. He would further submit that the witnesses in the disciplinary proceedings had not deposed anything against the petitioner.