RSRTC, AJMER Vs. PRABHAT ACHARAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the writ applications raise a common question of law and facts, therefore, are being adjudicated upon by this common order. In all the writ applications, the petitioner Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation, for short), is aggrieved of the order dt. 2.05.2003 whereby the Labour Court & Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as the Labour Court', for short) declined to frame preliminary issue as regard to the fairness of the enquiry in view of the opinion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Cooper Engineering Limited vs. Shri P.P. Mundhe, 1975 AIR(SC) 1900; Shambhu Nath Goyal vs. Bank of Baroda & Ors., 1984 AIR(SC) 289, and Bharat Forge Company Ltd. vs. A.B. lodge & Anr., 1996 4 AIR(SC) 374 , as the case was not one under Sec. 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1947, for short) inserted by Act 45 of 1971 with effect from 15.12.1971. The provisions of Sec. 11A of the Act of 1947 are attracted in cases of discharge and dismissal alone and not in the matters where other penalties have been imposed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation reiterating the contents of the writ application emphasized that since the respondent-workman questioned the fairness of the domestic enquiry and if the learned Labour Court arrived at the finding holding the domestic enquiry to be unfair, in that event the Corporation would be deprived to prove the charge(s) by leading evidence supporting the fairness of the enquiry and therefore, the preliminary issue on the fairness of the enquiry ought to be framed by the learned Labour Court.

(3.) The learned counsel would further urge that framing of preliminary issue with regard to the fairness of the enquiry is necessary for the reason that the enquiry has been conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Standing Orders of the Corporation. The learned counsel also contended that the Standing Orders of the Corporation, do not bifurcate for major or minor punishment with regard to the penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment. However, stoppage of annual grade increment with cumulative effect bears on the entire career of the workman and therefore, it was imperative for the learned Labour Court & Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer to have framed preliminary issue as regards to fairness of the inquiry, even if the punishment imposed may not have been discharge or dismissal, attracting the provisions of Sec. 11A of the Act of 1947.