VASANT LADOO NAIK Vs. KOHINOOR MILLS NO 1

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Petitioner inter alia, seeks to challenge refusal of backwages by the Labour Court in Application (LCB) No. 802 of 1978, decided on November 28, 1986, and also decision of the Industrial Court by which Appeal of the workman No. 106 of 1986 was partly allowed granting 20% of the backwages; whereas, the petitioner was seeking full backwages as mentioned hereinabove.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows :-

(3.) IT is now well settled principle of law that the criminal inquiry is quite distinct from the domestic enquiry and the rules which are applicable to a domestic enquiry do not apply to the cases of criminal enquiry/trial. In the event of an employer coming to the conclusion that the acquittal of the Criminal Court was based on benefit of doubt, the employer was entitled to charge-sheet the employee and hold an enquiry which has been done in the present case. However, as indicated above, the domestic enquiry was held to be unfair and secondly even the conscience of the Labour Court was not satisfied before which evidence was led, and the Labour court came to the conclusion that the charge of misconduct was not proved. In the circumstances, one fails to understand as to how the Labour Court could refuse the backwages on the ground that the acquittal by the Criminal Court was not a clean acquittal.