AJIT SINGH Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a Driver in the Haryana Roadways, was dismissed from service as he had taken an alcoholic drink during the duty period, was unable to drive the bus full of passengers and" created a scene. " Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner sought a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Government of Haryana referred the matter to the Labour Court. After recording evidence, the Labour Court found that the dismissal of the claimant, was justified and in order and as such the claimant is not entitled to any relief. " Aggrieved by this award, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(2.) MR. Ajai Mittal, learned counsel for the petition has raised a two-fold contention. Firstly it has been submitted that the order of dismissal is vitiated as no enquiry as contemplated under the provisions of Articles 311 (2) was held. It has been further contended that the petitioner had given a reasonable explanation regarding the factual position and that on the evidence on record the award cannot be sustained. The claim made on behalf of the petitioner has been controverted by learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) IT is the admitted position that on September 12, 1980, the petitioner was driving Bus No. HBD 4996. He was prosecuted under Section 34 of the Police Act. He was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal on September 18, 1980. He pleaded guilty. The Court convicted him. He was, however, released after being admonished. That having happened, the punishing authority found that the petitioner's conduct which led to his conviction was unbecoming of a public servant. Consequently, it passed the order of dismissal. In a case where a person is dismissed or removed from service "on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge. " the provisions of Article 311 (2) which provide for an enquiry and the grant of a reasonable opportunity before punishing a civil servant, are not attracted. The language of Proviso (a) to Article 311 (2) is absolutely clear in this behalf. It provides an exception to the general rule that no person shall be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank except after an enquiry. The purpose of an enquiry is merely to find facts. Once a person holding a civil post has been tried by a competent court, the facts are established. Nothing remains to be enquired into.