AUTOMOTIVE MANUFACTURERS PVT. LTD. C 25 AND 26, CHIKALTHANA, MIDC, AURANGABAD Vs. SHAIKH NASEER SHAIKH KASIM AGE. MAJOR, OCC. UNKNOWN, R/O. HOUSE NO.2481298, SHAMSHAN NAGAR, NEAR KALIMIYA MASJID, SHAHANOORWADI, AURANGABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent.

(2.) This petition questions the legality and correctness of the impugned judgments and orders dated 16.02013 and 20.08.2015 passed by the Labour Judge, Aurangabad and the Member of the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, thereby holding that the domestic enquiry conducted against the respondent workman as defined under section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, in the employment of the petitioner company was illegal, improper and void.

(3.) It so happened that in the year 2008, the respondent was working as an Assistant Mechanic with the petitioner company. When he was present on duty on 2nd Sept., 2008, some differences arose between him and one Senior Service Manager, which culminated into physical assault being made by the respondent upon the Senior Service Manager of the company. The Manager sustained injuries and was required to be admitted to hospital for treatment of the injuries. In this assault, there were some other workmen as well, who had joined the hands of the respondent. The charge of misconduct was levelled against the respondent and enquiry was made. The Enquiry Officer found that the misconduct was proved. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent to which he responded by submitting an explanation. However, it was not accepted and a dismissal order on 24.04.2009 was passed. The respondent felt that the dismissal order was invalid in law and amounted to unfair labour practise and therefore he filed a complaint being ULP No.55 of 2009 before the Labour Court, Aurangabad. The learned Judge of the Labour Court held that the enquiry conducted against the respondent was illegal and void and accordingly passed an order dated 16.02.2013 setting aside the dismissal order and giving an opportunity to the petitioner to prove misconduct against the respondent in accordance with the law. This order was carried in revision being Revision ULP No.39 of 2013 but without any success, as the Revision Application came to be dismissed by the learned Judge of the Industrial Court by order passed on 20.08.2015. It is these orders which give rise to the present writ petition.