LAWS(JHAR)-2002-8-116

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO MANAGEMENT OF GOVINDPUR COLLIERY OF AREA NO.III OF BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1

Decided On August 14, 2002
Employers In Relation To Management Of Govindpur Colliery Of Area No.Iii Of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Appellant
V/S
PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1 Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Central Government, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 10(1) (d) and (2 -A) referred the following dispute for adjudication before the Central Government, Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad : - -

(2.) THE case of the Management of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited was that on 11.5.1983 at about 11.00 a.m. a mob of two hundred persons armed with deadly weapons committed several acts of violence on the person of Shri H.N. Tripathi, the General Manager of the Barora area. The said mob abused Shri Tripathi and threatened him with dire consequences. The act was committed within the precincts and premises of the Offices of Mr. Tripathi. The mob caused damage to valuable properties belonging to him and the Management. According to the Management, the concerned Workman led the violent mob instigating and inciting it to commit various acts of violence and mischief. Consequently, the charge - sheet was Issued and an inquiry was held and since the concerned Workman did not attend the enquiry and did not give satisfactory reason for not attending the same, the Enquiry Officer held the Enquiry exparte on 27.7.1983. Finally, the Enquiry Officer submitted his report holding the concerned Workman guilty of the misconduct levelled against him. Thereafter, he was dismissed from the service by letter dated 8.4.1987 for commission of misconducts proved against him in the Departmental Enquiry. An Industrial dispute was raised which ultimately culminated in the reference mentioned above whereafter the Tribunal, came to a finding that the action of the Management in dismissing the concerned Workman was not justified and accordingly the order of dismissal was set aside and the Management was directed to reinstate him with full back wages and continuity of service.

(3.) IN the back drop of the aforesaid findings, it would be perhaps necessary to quote below the charges that were leveled against the concerned Workman :