NARAYAN PRASAD SHRIVASTAVA Vs. DEPUTY CHIEF MINING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of order dated 6.3.1998 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Jabalpur as well as the order dated 17.8.1982, by which the penalty of dismissal of service has been imposed on the original petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'petitioner').

(2.) FACTS giving rise to filing of the writ petition in nutshell are that the petitioner namely Narayan Prasad, who expired during the pendency of the instant writ petition was initially employed on the post of 'Explosive Carrier' in the year 1952. By order dated 28.3.1956, he was promoted as Shot Firer Grade -II. On 11.10.1981, the petitioner was on duty from 12 O'clock in the night till 8 a.m. in the morning. One Ramkishore, who was unauthorisedly carrying detonators was caught by the security man at about 7 a.m. in the morning. Upon interrogation, the aforesaid Ramkishore informed that he has purchased the detonators from one Narayan.

(3.) A charge -sheet dated 16.10.1981 was issued to the petitioner containing the charge that on 11.10.1981, he sold 123 detonators to Ramkishore for consideration of Rs.20. The petitioner on receipt of the aforesaid chargesheet, submitted his replies and denied the charge. By the communication dated 17.9.1982, the petitioner was informed that the decision to institute departmental enquiry has been taken against him. The petitioner was asked to appear on 23.1.1982. On 25.1.1982, the witnesses on behalf of the Management were examined. Thereafter on 6.2.1982, the petitioner was informed that on the next day i.e. on 7.2.1982, he is required to adduce his evidence. The petitioner adduced his evidence in the departmental enquiry on 7.2.1982. Thereafter, the Inquiry Officer on 15.2.1982 submitted the report in which the charge levelled against the petitioner was found to be proved. The Disciplinary Authority, after considering the gravity of charge levelled against the petitioner, vide order dated 17.8.1982 imposed the punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner, thereupon raised the dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The Tribunal vide order dated 20.9.1995 held that domestic enquiry initiated against the petitioner was legal and valid. Thereafter by the award dated 6/3/1998, the Tribunal held that the punishment which has been awarded to the petitioner is commensurate to the misconduct committed by him. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court.