O N G C Vs. SAHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS Sahdev Singh and Rohtas Kaliram were employed in the Oil and Natural Gas Commission. On 18 -9 -1974 there was an agitation at a drill site of Oil and Natural Gas Commission, where the two of them were working. Several charges were levelled against them and some other, of misconduct. The substance of the charges was that after consuming liquor, they had incited the other employees to commit acts of indicipline and thereafter had assulted certain superior officers, in addition to committing other acts of misconduct. A departmental enquiry was held into these charges. The Enquiry Officer in his report came to the conclusion that none of the charges was proved against Sahdev Singh. However he came to the conclusion that Rohtas Kaliram was one of the persons who actively participated in the incident and the evidence also indicated that he had manhandled one of the superior officers. The Enquiry Officer forwarded the enrire matertial to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, thereafter, came to the conclusion that some of these charges was proved against both these person. On this basis the penalty imposed on Rohtas Kaliram was of reversion to the next lower post for a period of one year and to Sahdev Singh of stoppage of five increments with cumulative effect. The period of suspension in the case of both of them was ordered to be treated as not on duty and therefore, the remaining emoluments required to be paid for the period of suspension, was also not paid to them.

(2.) THE Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal of both these persons, upholding the punishment imposed on them by the Disciplinary Authority. It is in these circumstances that separate writ petitions were filed by Rohtas Kaliram and Sahdev Singh in this Court, challenging the imposition of penalty and dismissal of their appeal. A learned Single of this Court, by a common order, has allowed the writ petitions and directed that both these workmen should be given all consequential benefits. The learned Judge has been impressed by the fact that the charges relate to the year 1974 and remanding the matter for a fresh decision by the Disciplinary Authority, on account of some technical lapses, would not be justified and therefore, opined that the matter should be closed at this stage. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, the employer has preferred these two appeals, arising out of the two writ petitions.

(3.) THAT leaves for consideration the matter relating to Rohtas Kaliram. In our opinion, the lapse of the same period since the date of the incident, is no doubt material also in the case of Rohtas Kaliram, but the finding of the Enquiry Officer does indicate that his total exoneration may not be conductive to discipline in the industry. There is a definite finding of the Enquiry Officer that Rohtas Kaliram was one of the persons actively involved in the ineident, who had also incited others and there was evidence to suggest that he had also committed some acts of indiscipline. Even though in his case also remanding the case to the Disciplinary Authority for a fresh decision, after a period of about 12 years, would not promote the cause of industrial peace in the industry and therefore, we refrain from doing so, yet, it is necessary to visit Rohtas Kaliram with some penal consequences, as his case is different from that of Sahdev Singh. We are informed that Rohtas Kaliram was not given the full wages for the period of suspension and the period of suspension was also not to be treated as spent on duty. It would be sufficient to deprive Rohtas Kaliram of the remaining emoluments for the period of suspension, in addition to the subsistance allowance already paid to him, but the period of suspension shall be taken into account for all other purposes, as also treated as period spent on duty. We modify the order of the learned Single Judge with regard to the consequential benefits to be given to Rohtas Kaliram to this extent only. Subject to this modification, the appeal against Rohtas Kaliram also fails and is dismissed.