SAT PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing award dated 5.2.1986 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Labour Court, Rohtak. It has been held that the workman-petitioner has no right to approach the Labour Court because he had earlier filed CWP No. 764 of 1977 on the same cause of action which was dismissed in limine (Ex W/3). Holding that the Labour Court was not competent to go behind the single word order of this Court "dismissed" it has been held that still it would bar the jurisdiction of the Labour Court to grant any relief to the workman-petitioner. On merits also, the Labour Court has found that the workman-petitioner who was working as Conductor had been found guilty of pocketing the fare collected from the passengers on 24.11.1971. The afore- mentioned mis-appropriation and embezzlement was found by the Inspector Shri Gurditta Mal who has appeared as MW-2. The Inspector has found that the workman-petitioner had realized a sum of Rs. 5.50 from 10 passengers without issuing them travelling vouchers. Placing reliance on a judgment of the Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Surat Singh,1984 3 SLR 514, the Labour Court held that in case of misappropriation of government money by the Conductor of the State Transport such a person cannot be reinstated because reinstatement of such conductor would provide him another opportunity to repeat his conduct.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the workman-petitioner was employed as a Conductor with the Transport Department of the respondent-State on 1.4.1970. His services were terminated on 3.6.1972 after holding a domestic inquiry. It has been alleged that the workman-petitioner has not been granted any opportunity for participation in the inquiry and punishment of dismissal awarded in that inquiry is dis-proportionate to the alleged mis-conduct. The respondent-department took the stand that the workman-petitioner had already filed CWP No. 764 of 1977 which was dismissed and inquiry conducted was consistent with the principles of natural justice in which the workman- petitioner was given full opportunity to defend himself. The Labour Court also framed two principal issues namely as to whether the dismissal of the writ petition No. 764 of 1977 would be a bar to maintain a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and whether the inquiry proceedings conducted by the respondent-department were fair and proper and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

(3.) On the issue of maintainability of the reference the Labour Court has opined that there was a bar to seek reference under Section 10 of the Act after the dismissal of CWP No. 764 of 1977 by this Court. The views of the Labour Court in this regard read as under :