SURENDRANATH KHUNTIA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition seeks quashing of order dated 12.11.1997 of the Industrial Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar (Annexure -3) according approval under the proviso to Sub -Section(2) of Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) to the action of the management in dismissing him from service.

(2.) I .D. Case No.42 of 1991 was subjudice before the Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar wherein the issue was whether the refusal of employment to all the workmen in the garb of lock out declared by the management was justified. While the said reference was pending, the petitioner was placed under suspension for his alleged misconduct whereafter charge was framed against him. A domestic enquiry was held wherein he was found guilty of the charges. After considering the enquiry report, the management decided to dismiss the petitioner from service, as provided in the Certified Standing Orders. Accordingly, the order of dismissal was communicated to him on 4.11.1992 which was required to be approved by the Industrial Tribunal as provided in the proviso to Sub -Section(2) of Section 33 of the Act.

(3.) THE Tribunal recorded the following findings : (i) The petitioner did not furnish non -engagement certificate for the relevant period and he himself being a defaulting party cannot be allowed to make grievance of non -payment of subsistence allowance; (ii) As there is no provision in the Standing Order for supply of copy of the enquiry report to the delinquent workman, the petitioner was to ask for it. The petitioner has failed to prove that he made any such demand and the management refused to accede to such demand; and (iii) There is no provision in the Standing Order that a second show cause notice was to be served on the workman and, therefore, non -service of the second show cause notice along with the enquiry report did not cause any prejudice to him.