TATA STEEL LIMITED Vs. CONCERNED WORKMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case was taken up through Video Conferencing and heard at length on various dates, lastly on 24/8/2020 and Judgment was reserved and the same is being pronounced today. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding which has been held through Video Conferencing and there is no complaint in respect to audio and video clarity and quality and after hearing at length, the matter is being disposed of finally.

(2.) Petitioner-Management has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Notification of Reference dtd. 21/6/2007, whereby and where under the appropriate government has referred the dispute with respect to the discharge of concerned workman from the service for adjudication before the Labour Court, Jamshedpur and to hold and declare that the dispute is hopelessly stale and not maintainable and valid in law.

(3.) Factual matrix of the case is that on 11/12/2003, a dispute was raised by one A.K. Sharma (concerned workman) who was working as a Khalasi in the Bar Forge Shop of the petitioner-Management, with respect to his discharge from the service of the company on 25/1/1996. The said dispute was referred for conciliation. The petitioner-Management appeared before the Conciliation Officer and a reply was filed stating therein that the said dispute was stale and thus not maintainable. The concerned workman was dismissed from the service on 25/1/1996 after conducting fair and proper domestic enquiry for a serious act of misconduct, misappropriation of company's materials, property and abating by producing forged documents etc. The concerned workman fully participated in the enquiry proceedings and after following principles of natural justice, the workman was held guilty of eleven charges and was dismissed from the Company's service vide order dtd. 25/1/1996. Against the said order of discharge dtd. 25/1/1996, the concerned workman raised the dispute on 11/12/2003 i.e. after more than eight years. The said dispute was referred by the appropriate government for adjudication vide Notification of Reference dtd. 21/6/2007 on the following terms: