RAJESH KUMAR Vs. JUDGE, LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. In this writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner workman has prayed for quashing the award dt. 10.10.2000 (Annexure -5) passed by Judge, Labour Court, Jodhpur whereby the reference was made by the appropriate government with regard to dispute of validity of termination of the petitioner from service w.e.f. 29.06.1994 was held to be valid.

(2.) THE main contention of counsel for the petitioner is that disciplinary inquiry conducted against the petitioner under Sec. 11 -A of the ID Act, 1947 was not in consonance with law and it was conducted without considering the details of the reply filed by the petitioner in the inquiry. The required documents were also not supplied to the petitioner but the Judge, Labour Court, Jodhpur passed the impugned award against the petitioner and held the petitioner's termination valid, which is totally illegal and not in consonance with the provisions of law. It is further contended that enquiry conducted by the employer was not in consonance with law, that too was conducted without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the award, which is totally based on surmises and conjectures may be quashed.

(3.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have perused the impugned award. In the award, it is categorically observed that all the relevant documents were supplied to the petitioner in the inquiry so also opportunity to cross -examine the witnesses was also given to the petitioner and further, it is observed that petitioner himself did not cooperate in the inquiry, therefore, the enquiry officer gave finding against the petitioner for alleged misconduct. In the opinion of this Court, the award passed by Judge, Labour Court, Jodhpur is based upon finding of fact, which does not require any interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In view of above, I see no reason to interfere in the impugned award. Therefore, this writ petition is hereby dismissed.