GENERAL MANAGER, HARYANA ROADWAYS Vs. HAWA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been preferred by the State challenging the award dated 31st October, 1988 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala City, - -vide which Respondent No. 1 - -workman has been held entitled to reinstatement in service with continuity and back wages.

(2.) IT is the contention of the counsel for the Petitioner that as per Article 311 (2)(a) of the Constitution of India, a person can be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge without holding of departmental enquiry. He submits that the Respondent -workman was appointed as a Driver on 11th November, 1981. He continued in service till 31st July, 1985 when his services were terminated exercising the powers under Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India on the ground that the Respondent -workman was convicted under Sections 304/ 337 IPC by the Sessions Judge, Bhiwani and he has been awarded the punishment of one year imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1, 500. It has further been submitted that the workman was admitted to District Jail, Bhiwani on 13th November, 1984 and on the date when the order of termination i.e. 31st July, 1985 was passed, the workman was still in jail. He, on this basis, submits that the termination of the workman was in accordance with law and, therefore, the award dated 31st October, 1988 cannot be sustained. While taking me to the award, counsel for the Petitioner has brought it to my notice that the Labour Court has been impressed by only one circumstance i.e. the act of the workman, which has led to the registration of the FIR dated 14th November, 1978, was an offence, which had been committed by him prior to his joining the service. On that ground the order of termination of the workman has been held to be not in accordance with law. Another ground, which has been taken by the Labour Court for holding the termination order as illegal, is that no enquiry was held before the order of termination was passed.

(3.) IN any case, counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that as per Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1987, which is applicable to the Respondent -workman, the enquiry was not required to be held against an employee in case of his conviction on a criminal charge. Rule 7(1)(2) is reproduced hereinbelow: