BOSCH LTD. Vs. BOSCH EMPLOYEES UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-employer has filed this petition challenging the Award dtd. 13/12/2023 passed by the Presiding Officer, First Labour Court, Nashik in Reference (IDA) No. 9 of 2004. The Labour Court has answered the Reference partly in the affirmative and has directed that the members of the Respondent-Company Shri. R.R. Kanade and Shri. S.S. Pagar are entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service from 20/1/2003 without any backwages. Petitioner is accordingly directed to reinstate the said two workmen with continuity in service from 20/1/2003.

(2.) Petitioner is a Company engaged in manufacturing of fuel injection equipment, such as nozzles, nozzle holders, elements etc. It has registered office at Bengaluru and factories at Bengaluru, Nagnathpur, Jaipur and Nashik. Respondent is a registered union of workmen employed with the Petitioner. On 29/9/2002, an employee of the Petitioner, Mr. S.R. Chavan suffered cardiac arrest and collapsed at Petitioner's Nashik factory. According to Petitioner, Mr. Chavan was a heart patient for a long time and had undergone a coronary bypass surgery in June 2001 and had reported for duties in August 2001 and was medically habilitated by allotting light work. Mr. Chavan was declared dead at around 10.05 a.m. after unsuccessful attempts by the doctor in Petitioner's Medical Department to activate his heart. A huge mob of workmen in Nashik factory gathered outside the Medical Department. Mr. S.B. Deshpande, Dy. General Manager (HR), President of Respondent- Union, as well as the other union members arrived at the Medical Department. According to Petitioner, provocative and instigating speeches were delivered to the mob demanding expulsion of Mr. S.B. Deshpande. As a result of such provocative and instigating speeches, the mob prevented the dead body of the deceased employee to be taken out from the factory premises for post-mortem. Police was summoned, who was also prevented by the mob from carrying out the investigation process and the police in-charge was stopped from entering the premises. According to Petitioner, eight workmen viz. Mr. S.S. Pagar, Mr. R.R. Kanade, Mr. M.V. Rakibe, Mr. D.N. Dhatrak, Mr. N.M. Jadhav, Mr. R.T. Shinde, Mr. J.S. Ahirrao and Mr. S.K. Kale (delinquent workmen) instigated the mob not to accept the offer of the management for conduct of enquiry after taking out the dead body outside the factory premises and demanded Mr. S.B. Deshpande's expulsion. According to Petitioner, the mob became riotous and was on the verge of violence. That local media was escorted by the delinquent workmen and the media covered the entire episode through video shooting on account of which the instigated workmen got excited and started shouting and waiving their hands. Few workmen gave bytes to the media alleging delay in settlements. To calm down the situation, Mr. Deshpande offered to have himself arrested but the delinquent workmen demanded Mr. Deshpande's custody with instigated mob. At around 13.20 hrs, Assistant Commissioner of Police took out Mr. Deshpande from the Medical Department towards the police van and while he was being taken away, Mr. R.R. Kanade and Mr. S.S. Pagar alongwith Mr. Jadhav, Mr. Kadam and Mr. Dhatrak in addition to other delinquent workmen tried to pull Mr. Deshpande from the police van with the intention of assaulting him. According to the Petitioner, if Mr. Deshpande was not to be escorted by the police, the situation would have resulted in his mob lynching. This is how the dead body of the deceased workmen was detained by the delinquent workmen for four hours in the medical department.

(3.) Petitioner suspended all the delinquent workmen and initiated domestic enquiry against them. On 14/10/2002, chargesheets were issued to the delinquent workmen including Mr. R.R. Kanade and Mr. S.S. Pagar. The delinquent workmen submitted replies denying the charges. Enquiry was conducted before the Enquiry Officer-Advocate Mr. R.S. Bhalekar from 30/10/2002 onwards. It appears that on 30/10/2002, the delinquent workmen accepted the charges of misconduct levelled against them and did not press the reply submitted by them to the chargesheet. The Enquiry Officer still conducted enquiry in which Management, as well as the delinquent workmen led oral and documentary evidence. Enquiry Officer submitted report dtd. 28/12/2002 holding charges levelled against all the delinquent workmen to be proved. Petitioner issued show cause notices dtd. 2/1/2003 to the delinquent workmen alongwith copies of enquiry report. The delinquent workmen filed their replies to the show cause notices. Petitioner thereafter issued termination letters dtd. 30/1/2003 to all the delinquent workmen terminating their services w.e.f. 20/1/2003. It appears that a dispute was pending before the Arbitrator since March 2002 relating to payment incentives and therefore application dtd. 30/1/2003 was made by the Petitioner to the Arbitrator under Sec. 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act for approval of termination of delinquent workmen and accordingly Arbitrator approved the same by order dtd. 27/12/2004.