SANTOSH CHANDRKANT POTDAR Vs. BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both the present writ petitions arise out of a common Award, involve identical questions of law, and arise from the same factual background, it is considered appropriate to hear and decide them together. Accordingly, both the petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Writ Petition No.15252 of 2024 has been instituted under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner- workman, challenging the Award dtd. 18/1/2024 passed by the Industrial Court, Thane in Complaint (IT) No.1 of 2014, insofar as the Tribunal declined the relief of reinstatement with full back wages. On the other hand, Writ Petition No.8711 of 2024 has been preferred by the petitioner-company assailing the very same Award to the extent the Industrial Court recorded a finding that the termination of workman had taken place during the pendency of References and, therefore, amounted to breach of Sec. 33(2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the present proceedings, as pleaded by the petitioner-workman, may now be noticed. A charge-sheet dtd. 12/10/2012 came to be issued against the petitioner alleging misconduct under Standing Order Nos.31(I), (III), (VIII), (XI), (XXXIV), (XL), (XLIII) and (XIII) of the Certified Standing Orders applicable to the establishment. The charges were thus founded upon alleged acts of misconduct recognised under the service conditions governing the parties.