MANOHAR KHANDU WALUNJ Vs. CRICKET CLUB OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) Petitioner-workman has filed the present Petition challenging the judgment and order dtd. 25/11/2019 passed by the learned President, Industrial Court, Maharashtra, Mumbai, allowing Revision Application (ULP) No.31 of 2018 filed by the Respondents and setting aside judgment and order dtd. 29/12/2017 passed by the Judge, Labour Court, Mumbai in Complaint (ULP) No.489 of 1999, by which Labour Court had directed payment of compensation to the tune of 40 months' salary including allowances to the Petitioner for wrongful termination of his services. The Petitioner had filed cross Revision Application (ULP) No.157 of 2018 to the extent of denial of relief of backwages, which has been dismissed by the Industrial Court vide common judgment and order dtd. 25/11/2019.

(3.) Brief facts leading to filing of the present Petition are that Petitioner was appointed with Respondent No.1-Cricket Club of India as Junior Attendant in its reception office. He was promoted in the year 1981 to the position of Receptionist and thereafter as Senior Receptionist. Petitioner remained absent during 19/4/1997 to 23/4/1997 due to demise of his father-in-law. Again, in November-1997 he was absent from duties. A show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner in respect of absence, which was replied by him on 29/7/1998. Respondent No. 1 issued charge-sheet dtd. 3/9/1998 to the Petitioner alleging absence from duty for 28 days in November-1997, 17 days in June-1998 and 27 days in July 1998. Another charge-sheet dtd. 14/9/1998 was issued to the Petitioner alleging that Petitioner had received video camera valued approximately at Rs.50,000.00 forgotten by a member in the banquet hall but did not make any entry with regard to receipt of the same, which was subsequently found to be missing. Accordingly, charge of the theft, fraud and dishonesty as well as habitual neglect of work was levelled against the Petitioner. Domestic enquiry was conducted against the Petitioner and the Enquiry Officer submitted report dtd. 7/4/1999 holding Petitioner guilty of misconduct of theft, fraud and dishonesty. After considering Petitioner's representation, order dtd. 14/5/1999 was passed dismissing the Petitioner from service.