N R KALIAPPAN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/worker seeks to quash the award of the Additional Labour Court, Maduari, in I.D.No.578 of 1989 dated 2.6.1992 and to direct the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service of the second respondent/Bank with all benefits and continuity of service.

(2.) The petitioner was working as the Secretary of the second respondent/Society with effect from 15.12.1967. He was issued with a charge memo 29.5.1979. He was imposed with a penalty of withholding increment for a period of six months without any cumulative effect. He further claims that he was ill and on medical leave from 6.9.1979. However, the management took the disciplinary proceedings against him for certain alleged omissions and commissions. An enquiry was instituted and in spite of his request for adjournment and without granting him an opportunity of being heard, the enquiry was completed and he was dismissed from service by order dated 3.10.1979. Aggrieved by the same, he filed a civil suit in O.S.No.448 of 1980 on the file of Sub-Court, Karur, praying for a declaration that the order of dismissal was invalid and illegal and for consequently for arrears of wages of Rs.9,480/-. The said suit was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge and on appeal also the learned District Judge, Karur, by judgment and decree dated 9.3.1987 dismissed A.S.No.97 of 1986. Thereafter, the petitioner/employee raised an Industrial Dispute as aforesaid and the Labour Court also rejected the contention of the petitioner. Hence, the above writ petition.

(3.) The Labour Court though found that the decree of the Civil Court would operate as res judicata, in the alternative, considered the merits also and found against the employee. Inasmuch as I am inclined to agree with the finding of the Labour Court that the relief claimed by the petitioner before the Labour Court was barred by res judicata, I do not propose to go into the merits of the issues relating to the dismissal of the petitioner.