LAWS(BOM)-2017-8-284

PRASAD PHADKE Vs. GOA SHIPYARD LIMITED

Decided On August 22, 2017
Prasad Phadke Appellant
V/S
GOA SHIPYARD LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is to the judgment and award dated 06/10/2009, passed by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, Government of Goa (Tribunal, for short), in Reference IT No.47/1995. By the impugned judgment and award, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the Reference, upholding the order of dismissal of the petitioner, passed by the respondent.

(2.) The respondent is a Public Sector Undertaking of the Central Government and has its Shipyard at Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. The petitioner was an employee of the respondent. On 16/07/1991, the petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry. On 31/07/1991, a chargesheet along with statement of allegations was served on the petitioner, alleging that the petitioner along with others, had indulged into acts of violence, resulting into the death of a coworker by name Avinash Volvoikar. The departmental enquiry was entrusted to one Mr. Raikar. After the respondent/ management led their evidence, the petitioner sought to examine one Mr. Vaz before examining himself. On 24/04/1993, the Enquiry Officer found that the request of the petitioner cannot be granted, as in the opinion of the Enquiry Officer, the petitioner in that event, may fill the lacunae, left in the evidence of the witness. In short, the request of the petitioner to examine his witness first, prior to his own examination, was refused and the Enquiry Officer closed the evidence of the petitioner. The Enuiry Officer gave his report on 29/10/1993, holding that the charges of misconduct are proved.

(3.) It appears that in the meantime, the State filed a Criminal Case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 149, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short), which was committed to the Court of Sessions and was registered as Sessions Case No.27/1992, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge at Margao, which arose out of the same incident, on the basis of which, the petitioner was proceeded departmentally.