ORISSA ROAD TRANSPORT CO LTD Vs. LOKNATH PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Orissa Road Transport Company Ltd. , the employer of opposite party No. 1 is the petitioner in this writ application. The order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Orissa, Bhubaneswar rejecting an application Under Section 32 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act) a copy of which is Annexure 2 to the writ application, has been impugned in this case.

(2.) OPPOSITE party No. 1 was serving under the Petitioner as a driver. It is alleged that on 19. 8. 1978 at about 10. 15 a. m. while the Traffic Manager, Orissa Road Transport Company, Berhampur was on duty in his office, the opposite party 1 went into the office room of the said Traffic Manager without any prior permission and threatened him raising his fist and saying that the order passed by him against another employee should be modified. The Traffic Manager expressed his inability to comply with the request of opposite party 1 for which he became furious and shouted at the Traffic Manager threatening to throw him out of the premises. It was further alleged that opposite party 1 intimated and attempted to assault the Traffic Manager. On these allegations, the police being informed registered a case against opposite party 1 for the offences under Sections 448/189/506, I. P. C. and after investigation, a criminal case bearing G. R. Case No. 698/78 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur was initiated. Simultaneously a disciplinary proceedings against opposite party 1 was initiated by the management of the petitioner-Company on the allegation that on the aforesaid date and time while the Traffic Manager was on duty in his office, the opposite party 1 intimidated and attempted to assault the Traffic Manager which constitutes a misconduct under Clause 14, Sub-clause (13) of the modified Standing Orders of the Company. He was directed to explain as to why he should not be discharged or dismissed from service on the aforesaid charges. Opposite party No. 1 submitted his explanation on 1. 1. 1979 denying the charges levelled against him whereafter the Deputy Director, Enforcement was appointed as the Enquiring Officer. During the enquiry conducted by the aforesaid Enquiring Officer, some witnesses were examined on behalf of the management who were cross-examined by the delinquent opposite party 1.

(3.) THE Enquiring Officer submitted his report giving a finding that opposite party 1 was guilty of the charges of unruly and violent behaviour in the office of the Traffic Manager on the aforesaid date and time and the opposite party 1 was served with the second show- cause notice dt. 9. 10. 1979 calling upon him to explain as to why he should not be discharged or dismissed from the service of the Company for the offence committed by him. Opposite party 1 submitted his explanation in response to the aforesaid notice denying the charges against him and stated that all the witnesses examined on behalf of the management being subordinates to the Traffic Manager, their evidence should not be accepted. The opposite party 1 prayed that he not being guilty of the charges levelled against him should be exonerated.