LAKHAN PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against an award dated 5th March, 2001 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, Jabalpur in case No. CGIT/lc/r/24/93 contained in Annexure P-1.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner is that he was employed in Cantonment board, Sagar and was working on the post of Store Keeper w. e. f. May, 1985. Three Show-cause notices for three different charges were issued to the petitioner by the Cantonment Board, Sagar in the year 1987 which included the allegations about the deficiency of goods kept in the store, un account ability of tyres and theft of tyres. The charges were denied by the petitioner. It is further stated by the petitioner that a full- fledged enquiry was conducted merely with regard to charge of un account ability of tyres whereas only preliminary enquiry was conducted with regard to the remaining two charges i. e. , deficiency of the goods kept in the Stores and theft of tyres. However, the Enquiry Officer held the petitioner guilty for all the charges on the basis of the enquiry report. The petitioner was dismissed from services w. e. f. 1-8-1991. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication with the following term of reference:-

(3.) THE petitioner submitted that the findings of the Enquiry Officer was not based on any cogent reason. Before the Central Government Industrial tribunal, parties submitted their respective claims and rejoinder. It was stated by the petitioner that the enquiry was not conducted in accordance with law and he was not afforded an opportunity to defend himself in a proper manner. It was further stated that the punishment imposed on the petitioner is too harsh and highly disproportionate.