DILIP ATMARAM RANE Vs. LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-employee is aggrieved by an order dated 16th September 2010. The operative part of which read thus:

(2.) It is contended that if the original enquiry proceedings were not filed on record and only a xerox copy of which was filed and Enquiry Officer who was examined, having not admitted the said record and the documents, if the opinion of the learned Judge was that the issue of fairness of the enquiry or perversity of the findings cannot be decided in such peculiar facts and circumstances, then, the fresh enquiry which is directed, could not have been by the employer and by the Enquiry Officer appointed by the employer as a logical corollary, the Court should have given that opportunity to the employer to lead evidence and prove the charges of misconduct alleged against the petitioner. The Court having permitted the employer to hold an enquiry in the charge sheet-cum-suspension order dated 3rd January 2001 and directed the petitioner to appear before it, has acted contrary to the scheme of Industrial Disputes Act and particularly section 11-A thereof.

(3.) On the other hand Mr. Naik appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the Court has directed fresh enquiry and whether it is conducted by the management or by permitting the management/employer to lead evidence in Court is immaterial and of no consequence. The opportunity contemplated by law has to be afforded and has been afforded. Therefore, this Court should not interfere with the order of the Labour Court, particularly because the petitioner has participated in the enquiry held pursuant to the impugned order.