RASTRIYA ISPAT NIGAM LTD Vs. M.RAMCHANDRER RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

(2.) The present Writ petition came to be filed assailing the order dtd. 8/3/2016 in L.C.I.D. No.61/2010 to quash the said order as it is illegal and barred by Res-judicata.

(3.) Facts of the case are like this: The 1st respondent in the Writ Petition is an employee under the petitioner company which is registered under the Companies Act as Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited, known as Visakhapatnam Steel Plant. The 1st respondent herein several times has been admonished and he was censured for several times and still his conduct of absenteeism is continued and due to his incorrigible absenteeism on medical grounds, he was referred to the Chief Medical Officer of the King George Hospital, Visakhapatnam on 3/10/1992. The Medical Officer gave a report that his claims of ill health are false. Accordingly, after constituting a committee and conducting a regular enquiry, a major punishment of removal from service was imposed on 24/12/1992. Against such removal order, the 1st respondent filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, i.e Deputy General Manager (Traffic and Raw Materials), who confirmed the punishment vide order dtd. 8/2/1993. Challenging the order of removal of the Appellate Authority, the 1st respondent herein filed W.P. No.8489 of 1995 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad and the said Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dtd. 16/10/1997 inter alia with a direction to consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically. Pursuant to the said order, the management has once again examined the matter and confirmed the order of removal. On the basis of the said Order in W.P. No.8489 of 1995, the petitioner herein made another representation dtd. 11/3/2002 and the said representation was considered and rejected. Aggrieved by the said rejection order, the 1st respondent herein filed W.P. No.25176 of 2002 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by an Order dtd. 20/12/2002, observing that the Writ Petitioner is not entitled for consideration of his representation for reemployment which request was already considered and rejected in 1997. The court observed that the writ petitioner does not found any merits. Accordingly, it was dismissed. After dismissal of the Writ Petition, the 1st respondent was kept quiet for a good length of time and again approached the 2nd respondent Tribunal challenging removal order dtd. 20/4/1992, which was confirmed by appellate authority on 8/2/1993. He challenged the said order after lapse of 8 years from the date of removal of the petitioner herein. The Tribunal after considering the evidence has allowed the dispute by an order dtd. 8/3/2016 in I.D.L.C. No.61 of 2010 and it was observed that the domestic enquiry conducted in this case is not valid. While disposing the dispute, the employee has been informed to take the help of a co-worker to assist before the enquiry committee and further he would also to be allowed to cross-examine the witnesses present in support of charges leveled against him at the time of concluding the domestic enquiry.