K VENKATARAMNA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT GUNTUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition to quash the award of the Labour Court, Guntur dated 26th August, 1963 in Industrial Dispute No. 1 of 1963 which was referred to it under section 10 (1) (c) by the Government as per G.O. Ms. No. 962 dated 16th May, 1963. The question referred to was whether the dismissal of the nine employees was justified.

(2.) The petitioners are the workmen who have put in a service of 8 to 14 years in the respondent company, Messrs. Ramdas Motor Transport (Private), Ltd., Kakinada.

(3.) They were dismissed by the management as a result of an enquiry into two incidents bearing upon their misconduct. On 1st December, 1962, four of the petitioners boarded at Karapa the bus A.P.P. 1712 which was going from Kapileswarapuram to Kakinada. The Checking Inspector questioned the conductor of the bus as to why he had allowed those people to travel in that mofussil bus without a ticket or a free pass. Of course they were entitled to travel in the city bus without a ticket but not by the mofussil bus. An interrogation by the Checking Inspector infuriated the said workers. It appears that he was threatened and detained at some place and finally was allowed to go. The Checking Inspector made his report to the management about the incident. This exasperated further all the workmen. On 8th of December, 1962, when the Checking Inspector was about to enter the Company's office, one of the workmen rushed at him and caught hold of him by the collar using abusive language and dragged him from the steps of the office. The other workmen surrounded him. Several bodily injuries were caused by inflicting fist blows. He was dragged to the road when he (the Checking Inspector) was eventually rescued. The next morning he gave a report to the management. The management as a result of this issued charge memos. to the workmen involved in the incidents and appointed the personnel officer as the enquiry officer. The enquiry officer inquired into both the incidents. The workmen took part in the first enquiry, but refused to take part in the second enquiry. The enquiry officer, after recording evidence, submitted his report. The Managing Director called for explanations from the delinquents and after considering the same issued orders dismissing the workmen from service. The case of the workmen was sponsored by the East Godavari Motor Transport Workers' Union. As a result of it, the Government referred the matter to the Labour Court. Before the Labour Court, the workmen complained that the enquiry as conducted was not a fair and proper enquiry. It was Urged that the charge memos. were issued to the delinquents prior to the holding of the preliminary enquiry by the personnel officer, that the statements recorded at the preliminary enquiry were not made available to the workmen, that they were denied a right of appeal against the final orders as that was passed by the Managing Director himself, that they were not given an opportunity to be represented by a person of their choice even though such facility was given to the management and that there was no allegation at all against two of the workmen in the statements of the witnesses. The Labour Court considered all these objections and repelled them one after another on merits. Of course some evidence also was adduced before the Labour Court. The Labour Court having found that the objections raised were untenable thought it Unnecessary to probe further into the matter having regard to the limited scope of its powers in the matter. It however found that there was no material which will enable it to come to the conclusion that the finding of the enquiry officer was baseless or perverse or was based on no evidence. In this view of the matter, the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court found that the dismissal of the nine workmen was justified.