PRASHANT KUMAR DEY Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court ("CGIT" for short) whereby, the reference proceeding arising from the punishment of removal of petitioner from service, awarded vide order dtd. 20/8/2015 has been decided against the petitioner/workman and punishment of removal granted to the petitioner has been confirmed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner has been made a victim of institutional bias and the attempt of the respondent of illegal insulation against any complaints against the Senior Management of respondent Southeastern Coalfields Ltd. ("SECL" for short). It is contended that the petitioner was initially appointed in the year 1976 and he was due to superannuate on 31/3/2017 but after he had attained almost 50 years of age, then he was made a victim of frequent transfers and from 2006 to 2014 he was transferred 6 times. The last transfer took place on 28/7/2014, on which date he was transferred from Pali to Pinoura sub-area and looking to the serious health issues of himself and his wife, the petitioner had approached the management to cancel the transfer order and to post him at some other suitable place in Johila area. However, there was a demand of bribe from two Senior Managers Finance, namely Shri Sudama Modi and Shree N. N. Bhaumik and the petitioner took the only legal recourse available to him, which was to make a complaint to the Chief Vigilance Officer which he did make on 8/8/2014 and when the Chief Vigilance Officer did not do anything, then he moved a complaint to the Collector, District Umaria on 7/10/2014 and as soon as the complaint was made to the Collector, the management developed malice and bias against the petitioner and a preliminary inquiry into the complaint of the petitioner was conducted by a Enquiry Committee headed by Shree P. K. Poddar, General Manager Operations of Johila area and it was found that the complaint made by the petitioner regarding demand of bribery could not be substantiated by him, and then the General Manager recommended taking necessary action against the petitioner.

(3.) Thereafter a charge sheet dtd. 9/1/2015 was issued to the petitioner containing the accusation that since the petitioner had made a complaint against senior officers, hence, it amounts to major misconduct. Thereafter an inquiry ensued in which he was not granted proper opportunity of hearing and then the termination order was issued on 20/8/2015 whereby he was terminated by way of removal by an order passed by the Deputy area Manager Pinoura under Johila area, SECL.