R RAJABATHER Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition No. 18968 of 1996 has been filed praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent relating to I. D. No. 17 of 1992 and quash the award dated 13. 9. 1993 and direct the second respondent management to give the petitioner all the benefits and award costs.

(2.) WRIT Petition No. 18969 of 1996 has been filed praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent relating to Complaint No. 4 of 1987, quash the award dated 13. 9. 1993 passed in Complaint No. 4 of 1987 and direct the second respondent management to give the petitioner all the benefits and award costs.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that he joined the services of the second respondent Management as a Fieldman and was later promoted as Cane Assistant and in the year 1971, the petitioner was promoted as a Senior Cane Assistant. In the year 1983, the petitioner was issued with a charge sheet alleging certain misconduct and the second respondent conducted a farce enquiry against the petitioner and passed an order demoting the petitioner as a Junior Cane Assistant for a period of two years. As against the order of punishment, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, Madras in I. D. No. 679 of 1984 and upon the formation of the first respondent Labour Court at Vellore, the same was renumbered as I. D. No. 17 of 1992. While so, when the dispute regarding the demotion of the petitioner was pending before the first respondent Labour Court, on 31. 12. 1986, the second respondent Management issued yet another charge sheet against the petitioner alleging certain other misconducts and consequently, on 11. 8. 1987, it dismissed the petitioner from service, without even filing a petition before the Labour Court for approving their action in dismissing the petitioner from service. As against the order of dismissal, the petitioner filed a departmental appeal before the Managing Director of the second respondent Mills on 26. 8. 1987, but by an order dated 14. 11. 1987, the said appeal was dismissed by the second respondent Management. On 17. 11. 1987, the petitioner filed Complaint No. 4 of 1987 against the second respondent Management for having contravened the provisions contained in Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Thereupon, the Management filed Approval Petition No. 1 of 1989 before the Labour Court, seeking approval of the dismissal order passed by them against the petitioner, but the Labour Court rejected the said petition by its order dated 29. 3. 1989 and the second respondent Management filed Writ Petition No. 5857 of 1989 against the order of the Labour Court passed in Approval Petition No. 1 of 1989. However, this Court, by order dated 26. 6. 1990, disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the Labour Court to take up the complaint after giving proper opportunity to the second respondent Management within a period of eight weeks. Ultimately, on 13. 9. 1993, the Labour Court dismissed I. D. No. 17 of 1992 as well as Complaint No. 4 of 1987. Hence the writ petitions.