MASINA HOSPITAL Vs. HARISH MAKAWANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-employer has filed the present Petitions challenging the judgments and orders dtd. 9/1/2024 passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Mumbai, allowing the Revision Applications filed by the Respondent-employees and setting aside the order dtd. 18/8/2022 passed by Labour Court, by which the Labour Court had held that the enquiry was fair and proper and that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are not perverse. The net result of the impugned orders passed by Industrial Court is that the preliminary issues relating to fairness in the enquiry and perversity in the findings of Enquiry Officer are answered against the Petitioner and in favour of the Respondent-employees.

(2.) Petitioner is a Charitable Hospital, which is managed by a Trust. The Respondent-employees were employed in Class-IV categories in the hospital. They were initially represented by Mumbai Labour Union. In the year 2010, some of the workmen in the Petitioner-Hospital joined Maharashtra Navnirman Kamgar Sena (MNKS) resulting in rift between the two Unions. It is the case of the Petitioner that on 9/2/2015, a committee member of MNKS Mr. Rupesh Mali-Wardboy was caught red- handed committing theft and was suspended from work for four days from 11/12/2015 to 15/12/2015. Petitioner-employer alleges that in view of suspension of the said committee member, the Respondent- employees created ruckus in the hospital premises on 11/12/2015 and physically assaulted Mr. Vinayak Kulkarni (Personal and Admin Officer) and Mr. Vidhyadhar H. Nare (Accountant) with iron rods and also hurled abuses and threats to them. It is alleged that Mr. Kulkarni was grievously hurt while Mr. Nare suffered minor injuries and both were required to be hospitalized. An FIR was lodged against 35 workmen involved in the alleged assault on 11/12/2015. Mr. Nare later reported loss of personal cash of Rs.5,000.00 and hospital cash of Rs.10,000.00. The Petitioner-employer accordingly suspended the 35 workmen involved in the incident with effect from 15/12/2015 and initiated domestic enquiries against them. Charge-sheets dtd. 9/2/2016 were issued to them. Petitioner-Hospital nominated enquiry officers to conduct enquiries against the 35 charge-sheeted employees. The enquiry was conducted jointly in groups of workmen by independent enquiry officers. According to the Petitioner-Hospital, the enquiries were conducted after following the principles of natural justice by affording due opportunity of defence to the Respondent-employees. The enquiry officers submitted reports holding that the charges were proved. Enquiry Reports were served on the Respondent-employees calling for their explanation. The Petitioner- Management thereafter imposed the punishment of dismissal on the Respondent-employees.

(3.) The Respondent-employees filed various complaints of unfair labour practice before Labour Court under Sec. 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (MRTU and PULP Act). Petitioner-Management filed its written statements. The Labour Court framed preliminary Issue No.1 relating to fairness in the enquiry and Issue No.2 about perversity in the findings of Enquiry Officer. It appears that during the course of hearing on the preliminary issues, the concerned Respondent-employees got acquitted in the criminal case vide judgment and order dtd. 23/10/2019 passed by the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate. After hearing the rival parties, the Labour Court proceeded to answer both the preliminary issues in favour of the Petitioner-Management and against the Respondent- employees holding that the enquiry is fair and proper and that findings of the enquiry officer are not perverse by its orders dtd. 18/8/2022.