BHOIR A N Vs. TATA POWER COMPANY LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of writ petitions before the Court raises a similar issue and has been heard together. The learned advocates for the parties state that the facts relating to all the cases are similar.

(2.) The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner-workmen has informed the Court that the petitioner-workmen are restricting the challenge in the present writ petitions only to the extent of impugning the orders, dated 23 June, 2006, passed by the Second Labour Court, Mumbai, holding that the departmental inquiry conducted against the petitioner-workmen was fair and proper and the findings not perverse. The learned advocate has further informed the Court that the action taken by the respondents of dismissing the petitioner-workmen from the employment of the respondent has been upheld by judgment of this Court, (Coram: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud J.) in Writ Petition Nos. 1996 to 1999 of 2009, dated 9 November, 2009, from which judgment an appeal has been preferred before the Hon'ble Division Bench.

(3.) The petitioner-workmen were employed as Senior Security Guards in the security department at the Trombay Thermal Power Station. The respondent supplies electricity to vital installations in the city of Mumbai including the Railways, Air force, Hospitals, BARC, Oil refineries and Defence establishments. The petitioner-workmen were on duty on 31 December, 1999 in the general shift from 07:00 hours to 16:30 hours. The workman in Writ Petition No. 347 of 2010, Kishor Salvi was on privilege leave from 21 December, 1999 to 31 December, 1999 and on the date of the incident have admittedly entered the premises of the respondent. At about 1350 hours all the petitioner-workmen along with the three other workmen were found to have consumed liqueur in the security guards locker room near the main gate of the power house at the Trombay Thermal Power Station of the three other workmen one was a driver and the other two were operators. On the same day amongst others the petitioner-workmen admitted their guilt in writing. The petitioner-workmen were also sent for medical examination. The medical report confirmed that the breath of the petitioner-workmen smelt strongly of alcohol, their eyes were red and there was tremor in hand. The petitioner-workmen were suspended from service on the same day. The respondent issued charge-sheets, dated 6 January, 2000, to the petitioner-workmen. On 10 January, 2000 the petitioner-workmen responded to, the charge-sheets by addressing letters to the respondent wherein they admitted that they were found consuming liquor along with other security guards.