AJIT BHAGWAN SAWANT Vs. PARVEEN INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in this Petition is about right of a workman to avail services of a legal practitioner to defend himself in the domestic inquiry when the Inquiry Officer is a legally trained mind. The issue arises in the light of challenge set up by the Petitioner to the Order dtd. 9/8/2023 passed by the Industrial Court at Thane rejecting application at Exh.U-2 in Complaint (ULP) No.240 of 2022 claiming interim relief, inter alia, for permission to engage Mr. Shishir Dhavale as defence representative in the inquiry.

(2.) Both the learned counsel have been heard extensively on the issue and they agree that the Petition can be decided finally. In that light, Rule which is made returnable forthwith.

(3.) Considering the narrow controversy involved in the present Petition, it is not necessary to narrate facts in detail. Suffice it to record that the Petitioner is working with the Respondent - Company and has been subjected to domestic inquiry by issuance of chargesheet dtd. 6/10/2022. The employer has nominated Mr. K. T. Dongre, a practicing Advocate, as Inquiry Officer. The management representative however is not a legal professional. Since the Inquiry Officer is a practicing Advocate, the Petitioner requested that he be granted an opportunity to engage an Advocate to act as defence representative. Alternatively, he requested for nomination of Mr. Shishir Dhavale, his well-wisher, to act as his defence representative. The Inquiry Officer has, however, rejected the request of the Petitioner for engagement of Mr. Shishir Dhavale to act as defence representative.