TATA POWER COMPANY LTD Vs. S M HARKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of writ petitions before the Court raises a similar issue and has been heard together. Counsel state that the facts relating to all the cases are similar. Rule, With the consent of the Counsel, the petitions are taken up for final hearing. Learned Counsel for the respondents waives service.

(2.) The respondent workmen were employed as Senior Security Guards in the Security Department at the Trombay Thermal Power Station. The petitioner supplies electric power to vital installations in the City of Mumbai including the Railways, Air Force, Hospitals, BARC, Oil Refineries and Defence establishments. All the workmen were on duty on 31st December 1999 in the general shift from 0730 hrs. to 1630 hrs. At about 1315 hrs., the workmen were found to have' consumed liquor alongwith three other workmen in the Security Guards' locker Room near the main gate of the Power House at the Trombay Thermal Power Station. The case of the management is that the workmen were caught red handed by Mr. P.B. Palekar (DGM) and Mr. D.G. Mehra (VP), while consuming beer together with three other employees. The workmen were suspended. A departmental inquiry was conducted on allegations of misconduct, contained in a charge sheet dated 6th January 2000. All the employees, it has been conceded before the Court by Counsel for the workmen, admitted the charge of misconduct. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 8th February 2000, holding the workmen guilty of misconduct. The workman in Writ Petition No. 1997 of 1999 was on privilege leave from 21st December 1999 to 31st December 1999 and on the date of the incident had entered the premises, when he was found to be consuming liquor. Upon the conclusion of the inquiry and in pursuance of the opportunity granted to them, the workmen submitted their explanations. A second show cause notice was issued by the Management calling upon the workmen to explain as to why they should not be dismissed from service. The Workmen came to be dismissed from service on 20th May, 2000. The Workmen filed application under sections 78 and 79 of Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 before the Labour Court.

(3.) The Labour Court by its Part I Award dated 23rd June, 2006 held that the inquiry was fair and proper. However, by its Part II Award dated 30th April, 2008, the Labour Court allowed the Application by granting reinstatement with 25% back wages. Cross Appeals were filed by the Management and by the Workmen. The Industrial Court allowed the Appeal filed by the employer in part by setting aside the direction for the payment of back wages. The order of reinstatement was confirmed.