JAGAT SINGH CHOUDHURY Vs. M P ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was employed as a Supervisor by the Madhya Pradesh Electricity board. As a result of an enquiry held against him on certain charges, Ms services were terminated on 18th June, 1964. The petitioner after usual approach notice filed an application before the Labour Court, Ujjain under section 31 of the Madhya pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 for reinstatement with back wages. The labour Court came to the conclusion that the domestic enquiry was defective. The court then itself enquired into the merits of the charges after giving both parties opportunity to lead evidence. It was finally held that four of the six charges were proved against the petitioner and the order of termination of his services was proper. The petitioner then went up in revision before the Industrial Court, Indore, which was dismissed on 14th December, 1966. The petitioner has now come up under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and prays that the order of the industrial Court and the Labour Court be quashed and the Electricity Board be directed to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages and other benefits.

(2.) THE first point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was not given adequate opportunity to examine certain witnesses before the Labour Court. This point was not argued by the petitioner before the Industrial Court. The petitioner, therefore, cannot be allowed to urge this point under Article 226.

(3.) IT was next contended that the Board by a notification issued in October, 1963 had applied the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules as a regulation applicable to the employees of the Board; that because of this notification Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules applied to the petitioner; that as the domestic enquiry held by the Board was not in accordance with Rule 55, it was wholly invalid and that as the matter was not governed by standing orders but by Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, control and Appeal) Rules, the Labour Court had no jurisdiction to enquire into the merits of the charges and after it was found that the enquiry was defective, the petitioner ought to have been reinstated.