SURAJ TEXTILE MILLS A UNIT OF NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, BATHINDA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the award dated 12.3.1990 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Labour Court, Bathinda vide which it has been held that as the petitioner had not issued the show cause notice before terminating the services of the respondent-workman therefore, the order of termination is bad and as a consequence thereof, the workman has been held entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Labour Court has over- looked the submission of the petitioner-Management wherein a specific stand was taken that no show cause notice was necessary as there is no service rule requiring issuance of, show cause notice before taking action against the workman. The said stand has been taken by the petitioner in para 14 of the writ petition which has not been denied by the workman in his reply. In the light of this, there can be no dispute that there was no requirement of the Rules with regard to issuance of show cause notice to a workman before taking action in pursuance to the enquiry report.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner further contends that the Labour Court has categorically held that the enquiry and/or the enquiry proceedings are in accordance with law and no ambiguity as far as the holding of the enquiry or the enquiry proceedings has been found by the Labour Court. This finding has attained finality as the same has not been challenged by the workman Counsel. on this basis, submits that when there is no requirement of issuing a show cause notice, as has been admitted by the workman, the Labour Court ought not to have interfered in the matter and proceeded to reinstate the workman with continuity of service with full back wages.