CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED Vs. CHAMAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by award dated 26.07.2013 whereunder, termination of the respondent from service of CCL has been held illegal and not justified, the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that, the respondentworkman was employed as permanent cook, categoryIII at Jarangdih Colliery. In the incident dated 30.09.1999 a chargememo was issued to respondent on 26.11.1999 alleging knowledge of the respondentworkman regarding occurrence of theft and the place where the stolen materials were concealed. A separate chargememo dated 13.12.1999 was also issued to the respondentworkman for not reporting at the company's headquarters, in terms of the Certified Standing Order. An enquiry was conducted in the matter and a copy of enquiry report was furnished to the respondentworkman along with second showcause notice dated 20.10.2000. After considering the enquiry report and the reply submitted by the respondentworkman the disciplinary authority vide, order dated 16.04.2001 inflicted punishment of "termination from the services of CCL". The respondentworkman raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. Aggrieved by award dated 26.07.2013, the present writ petition has been filed by Central Coalfields Limited.

(3.) Mr. A. K. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, once the domestic enquiry has been held to be fair and proper, the Industrial Tribunal cannot go beyond the findings recorded in the enquiry. It is submitted that, sufficient evidence was produced during the enquiry to prove the charges levelled against the respondentworkman and thus, without recording a finding that the finding of the enquiry officer is perverse, no interference with the award of punishment is permissible. In so far as, chargememo dated 13.12.1999 against the respondentworkman is concerned, the enquiry officer has recorded a finding that the charges have been found proved still, the Industrial Tribunal has interfered with the order of punishment awarded to the respondentworkman. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on decision in State of Karnataka Vs. H. Nagraj, 1998 9 SCC 671, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under;