BEST WORKERS UNION Vs. BEST UNDERTAKING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner No.2 claims to be a member and officebearer/ representative of the Brihan Mumbai Electricity Supply and Transport Undertaking Workers' Union. He was elected as the President of the Union and was working as a Bus Controller. Petitioner No.2 has put in 34 years of service. There was a strike in BEST Undertaking for one and half days from the mid-night of 18th April, 2007, to the evening of 20th April, 2007. The strike was peaceful. The Chairman of the respondents had made an appeal to the workers to withdraw the strike as they were assured that their demands would be considered and no action would be taken against any of the workmen.

(2.) The matter in relation to the strike and furnishing of undertaking was also questioned before the 6th Labour Court, Mumbai, which vide its order dated 23rd April, 2007, disposed of the matter requiring not to take undertakings from the workmen. However, vide order dated 27th April, 2007, petitioner No.2 was placed under suspension and it was stated in the order of suspension that a departmental enquiry was contemplated against him for certain irresponsible allegations against the management. It was also informed in the said order that the petitioner would have to participate in the departmental enquiry which was to commence on 4th May, 2007 at 10.00 a.m. The petitioner has questioned the correctness of the above order of suspension primarily on the ground that the order of suspension is arbitrary, punitive and is mala fide.

(3.) According to the respondents, the order of suspension is an order simpliciter on the ground that departmental enquiry is contemplated against the petitioner. The management has even completed its evidence before the enquiry officer and they are likely to conclude the departmental enquiry expeditiously and the present petition is an abuse of the process of law. It is stated in the order of suspension dated 27th April, 2007 that the petitioner, amongst making other irresponsible allegations and wild statements, had also stated that the officers of the Management had taken Rs. 3,000/- for giving employment to the persons in place of the employees who had participated in the strike. This allegation was viewed seriously by the management, which resulted in passing of the order of suspension and commencement of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner.