SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER CHIDAMBARANAR ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION CIRCLE T N E B TUTICORIN Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT TIRUNELVELI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition was preferred by the Superintending Engineer, Chidambaranar Electricity Distribution Circle, Tuticorin, (hereinafter referred to as 'electricity Board'), against the award dated 21st Oct. , 1992, passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Tirunelveli, in I. D. No. 521/90. By the said order, learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Tirunelveli held that the punishment of removal from service is excessive and disproportionate to the misconduct alleged and, thereby, rendered the order of removal illegal without awarding any punishment, as the workman had attained the age of superannuation in the meantime. The management of the electricity board has been directed to pay the terminal benefits, including pension, etc. Learned single Judge upheld the award giving rise to this appeal.

(2.) THE relevant facts for determination of claim are mentioned hereunder: -The 2nd respondent ? workman, who was working under the appellant, was proceeded departmentally in December, 1988. Inspite of service of notice, he did not choose to reply nor appeared in the proceeding. In the circumstances, the enquiry officer had to conduct ex-parte enquiry. On the basis of the evidence on record, he held the workman guilty of the charges. On 16th Nov. , 1988, a show cause notice was issued on the workman as to why he should not be removed from service. This time also, the workman did not choose to submit any reply, wherein after, the disciplinary authority, agreeing with the finding of the enquiry officer, removed the workman from service on 1st Feb. , 1989. The order was served on the workman on 23rd Feb. , 1989, against which he preferred appeal before the Chief engineer, Electricity Board on 3rd March, 1989 explaining his family circumstances and suffering for not attending the enquiry. The appeal having been dismissed, he forwarded a mercy petition to the Chairman of the Electricity Board on 18th Oct. , 1989,which having been rejected, he raised an industrial dispute u/s 2 (A) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The application was registered as I. D. No. 521/90. The appellant appeared and contested the matter. Learned Presiding Officer, by impugned award dated 29th Oct. , 1992, while upheld the enquiry proceeding and report submitted by the enquiry officer, held that the punishment of removal from service was disproportionate to the gravity of charges. The relief was granted to the workman, except back wages for the intervening period.

(3.) THE only question requires to be determined in this appeal is whether the punishment of removal from service as was imposed by appellant was proportionate to the gravity of the charges.