PRASRAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 9. 11. 2000 whereby the case of the petitioner has been refused by the Government to refer to the labour Court under section 12 (5) of the Industry Disputes Act, 1947 (for short as "act of 1947") on the ground that in the earlier case the Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur in its order dated 18. 4. 1991 has held that the domestic enquiry is against the principles of natural justice and punishment order dated 10. 10. 1990 is proper and fair.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner's services were terminated on 10. 10. 1990 while serving as painter Gr. I, against which a departmental appeal was filed and same was dismissed. On 18. 4. 1991, termination order was approved under the provisions of section 33 (2) (b) of the Act of 1947. On raising the civil dispute before the Civil Court, the suit was returned under Order 7, rule 11, CPC for want of jurisdiction. Thereafter, a complaint was moved before the Conciliation Officer, in which a failure report was submitted and ultimately the Government refused to refer the disdute vide Its order dated 9. 11. 2000 on the ground that the termination order has been approved under section 33 (2) (b) of the Act of 1947 and the domestic enquiry has been held to be in accordance with principles of natural justice and punishment order has been held to be proper and fair.

(3.) THE respondents State and RSRTC have filed reply wherein the aforesaid non-reference order has been justified on the ground that in the matter under section 33 (2) (b) of the Act of 1947, the departmental enquiry was found proper, just and fair and there was no violation of principles of natural justice.