KIRLOSKAR CUMMINS LTD Vs. SUBHASH SHRIPATI DAREKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Industrial Court, Pune, dated 28th August, 1991 in Revision Application No.22 of 1991, made in exercise of its powers under section 44 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(2.) THE First Respondent was employed in the service of the Petitioner Company in its factory at Pune as a Helper. On 10th September,1982, he was on duty and his duty hours were from 8.30 A.M. to 5.30 P.M. with lunch break from 11.15 A.M. to 12.00 noon. At about 11.15 A.M. the Assistant Security Officer, Manohar Prabhakar Gate, was observing whether the scooters and cycles had been properly parked or not. At this time the First Respondent was seen hurriedly leaving the cycle stand where he had parked his motorcycle. When the First Respondent left the cycle stand, he was carrying nothing, but going back inside the Factory. While the First Respondent was leaving the cycle stand, the said Assistant Security Officer, Manohar Prabhakar Gate, suspected the First Respondent's activities, and summoned the Welfare Officer, Shahane, Head Watchman, Malegaonkar, workmen Chaudhari and Bhosale and Kshirsagar, Engineer. Then the First Respondent was called to the cycle stand and informed that the Officers desired to take search of his motorcycle which had two side carriers. The said carriers were opened and found to be empty. The motorcycle had two dickies, one on each side. When the left side dicky was opened, it contained only the Tool Kit. The First Respondent was then directed to open the right side dicky. The First Respondent replied that his motorcycle had no dicky on the right side. When it was found that there was right side dicky, the First Respondent was forced to open it. The First Respondent half opened it and shut it saying that there was nothing in the dicky. When the right side dicky was opened, a bundle was seen stowed away inside. The First Respondent explained it away by saying that the bundle contained the bread which he had brought for his lunch. Not being satisfied with this explanation, the Officers opened the dicky; it was found to contain a copper wire about 14 feet long and weighing 2.5 kgs. The copper wire was of the type which was used in the Company for its manufacturing activity.

(3.) THE First Respondent challenged the dismissal order by his Complaint (ULP) No.49 of 1983 before the Labour Court, Pune. By an order dated 10th November,1987 the Labour Court dismissed the complaint. The First Respondent carried Revision Application (ULP) No.56 of 1987 thereagainst to the Industrial Court, Pune. By an order dated 17th October,1989, the Industrial Court, Pune, allowed the Revision and remanded the complaint for evidence on merits. A writ petition carried against the remand by the Petitioner Employer was summarily rejected with leave to challenge the remand order at a future date, if found necessary.