EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF TAPIN NORTH COLLIERY OF CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED Vs. THEIR WORKMAN BEING REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL GENERAL SECRETARY, NATIONAL COAL ORGANISATION (GOVERNMENT OF INDIA)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved of the findings returned in favour of the workman in W.P.(L) No. 33 of 2011, M/s. Central Coalfields Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'CCL') is before us through the medium of instant Letters Patent Appeal, which already stands admitted vide order dated 13th October, 2014 and on prayer of the workman, taken on Board for its final consideration out of the turn. Since the case, as set up by CCL, as one finds from the record, is with regard to impersonation of a workman, we would like to refer the name of the workman. He is Biraj Chouhan @ Biraj Nonia. As per CCL, he had impersonated one Sukhdeo Nonia and worked with CCL for long 26 years and then his services were terminated, which gave him a cause to knock at the doors of Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad (in short Tribunal') and obtained a favourable order of his reinstatement with 50% back wages from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement. CCL, being aggrieved of the award, approached the learned Writ Court through the medium of W.P.(L) No. 33 of 2011, which now stands dismissed by the learned Writ Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 5th September, 2012, affirming the view of learned Tribunal whereby it has been held that although the domestic inquiry held by CCL on preliminary issue was fair and proper, but, the findings arrived at on the basis of material produced before the concerned Enquiry Officer was not sufficient to prove the charge, inasmuch as the author of the report was not examined to test the authenticity of the report. Sukhdeo Nonia, who was allegedly impersonated, did not come forward to prove the fundamental charge against the workman in the domestic inquiry. Certain other aspects/infirmities have also been taken into consideration while affirming the findings of the learned Tribunal.

(2.) This is how CCL is before us through the medium of the instant Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) Heard Mr. Rajesh Lala, appearing for CCL and Mr. Rajesh Kumar appearing for the workman. We have also gone through the record.