PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, LUDHIANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-management has invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated March 28, 2005, October 7, 2005 and award dated December 14, 2005, vide which the reference has been answered in favour of the workman and against the management and that the workman has been ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages.

(2.) The brief facts need to be noticed are that the workman had joined the service with the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as "the management") as a Chowkidar at a monthly salary of Rs. 770/-, vide order dated 28.1.1991. During the period of service some complaints had been received against the workman in regard to theft of petrol and other material while working in the College of Home Science of the Management. He had been served the charge-sheet dated 2.9.1997 for the misconduct so committed. He submitted reply dated 9.10.1997. Inquiry Officer was appointed and also the Presenting Officer. The inquiry was conducted on different dates. However, the workman did not appear before the Inquiry Officer. In the reply he had admitted the charge relating to five chairs and one stool which having been found/recovered from his residence were, in fact, left by one Jagmal Singh. Thus, after taking into consideration the reply to the charges, the Inquiry Officer held the workman responsible, by submitting the report accordingly. A show-cause notice dated 13.2.1998 had been served upon the workman. A reply thereto was submitted, which had been considered by the competent authority and the same was found to be unsatisfactory. Resultantly, his services had been terminated on 11.3.1998 on account of the charges having been proved and established in accordance with law.

(3.) The workman served a demand notice dated 12.3.1998 upon the management, which was contested by way of submitting written comments before the appropriate authority. The conciliation proceedings failed, resultantly the appropriate government referred the "industrial dispute" for adjudication to the Labour Court, Ludhiana. The workman submitted the claim statement before the Labour Court, which had been duly contested by way of written statement dated June 12, 2002, submitted by the management, whereby preliminary objections had also been taken with the prayer that the claim of the workman is not sustainable. It has also been pleaded that the services of the workman were legally terminated on the basis of the inquiry conducted by the Inquiry Officer in accordance with law.