NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the common award in Industrial dispute No. 96 of 1986, etc. , dated September 10, 1990, on the file of the Labour Court, Coimbatore, petitioners numbering 14 have filed the above writ petition for quashing the same and also for direction directing the second respondent to reinstate all the 14 persons with back wages and with attended benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners is briefly stated hereunder: Petitioners are employees of the second respondent herein. While they are ventilating their grievance through their union, the second respondent filed a complaint before the police. Ultimately at the instance of the management the prosecution launched against the petitioners ended in acquittal. In respect of the same incident the second respondent initiated domestic enquiry and on the basis of the report of the enquiry officer dismissed all the petitioners from service. Thereafter the petitioners raised a separate industrial dispute before the third respondent. By a common award, dated September 10, 1990, the Labour Court upheld the action of the management in dismissing 14 petitioners, consequently dismissed all the applications, against which they filed the present writ petition.

(3.) THIRD respondent has filed a counter-affidavit disputing various averments made by the petitioners. It is stated that on February 16, 1983 at about 5. 30 P. M. about 20 workmen from Mudimund Division along with another 20 workmen from the 18th Division went in a procession carrying banners and shouting slogans. Near the factory they called the manager by name D. Pathy and demanded that the workmen should be paid the seven days wages which was deducted in the month of November 1982. Since the same was not accepted and after hearing that it could be discussed before the Labour Officer, they shouted slogans and one Narayanan and Dhodba Madhan struck the Manager from the left side. They also abused the Manager. His shirt was torn and the pant was also torn in the back. Thereafter under compulsion they obtained a statement from the Manager and also obtained his signature forcibly. In view of the violent activities indulged on February 16, 1983, a lockout was declared on February 17, 1983. Thereafter, on March 4, 1983 a settlement was made under Section 12 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), in which the workmen expressed regret for the incident which had taken place on February 16, 1983 and they also agreed that no wages shall be payable for the period of lockout. Arising out of the incidents, on February 26, 1983, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioners charging them with various acts of misconduct. All the petitioners participated in the enquiry. They examined 5 witnesses. The enquiry officer gave his finding on August 5, 1983, holding that the charges against the petitioners were proved. Based on the findings of the enquiry officer having regard to the gravity of the charges orders were passed on August 5, 1983 dismissing the petitioners from service. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, by separate order of reference the disputes raised by them were referred to third respondent for adjudication. The findings of the enquiry officer were duly considered by the third respondent and he rightly came to the conclusion that the findings of the enquiry officer do not improve the case for interference. With these averments they prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.