(1.) -Heard Shri Shishadri Trivedi, the learned counsel holding the brief of Sri Samir Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. N. Tripathi, the learned counsel holding the brief of Sri A. K. Verma, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE respondent No. 1 is a workman under the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act and was working in the diesel room of the Central Workshop of the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and while coming out from the security gate, was stopped and physically checked in the presence of witnesses and was caught taking out certain articles belonging to the Corporation, having a value. On the charge of an alleged theft, the workman was initially placed under suspension and thereafter charge-sheeted.
(3.) BEFORE the labour court, the workman filed his written statement alleging that no proper opportunity was given to him to defend himself in the departmental proceedings and that in any case, the charge of theft was not proved. The management also filed a written statement contending that full opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself and that the enquiry officer found that the charge of theft stood proved against him.