Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 720 (JHR)

Md. Yusuf Man v. Management Of Bokaro Steel Plant

2010-07-08

NARENDRA NATH TIWARI

body2010
JUDGMENT : Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. In this writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 25.2.2004 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro in Reference Case No. 15 of 1993. By the said punishment awarded to the concerned workman by the management has been held to be proper. It has been further held that the workman is not entitled to any relief. 2. The said dispute was referred on the objection of the concern workman that the domestic enquiry was not proper and he has been illegally awarded punishment of dismissal from the post of Khalasi, Operation Garage and he is entitled to be re-instated in the job and get other all consequential benefits. 3. The Case of the management, on the other hand, was that the concerned workman was appointed as Khalasi in the Company by letter dated 07.12.1978. His service was governed by the Company's certified Standing Order. Subsequently it was learnt that the concerned workman got employment on furnishing false information and concealing the facts. He had also dishonestly claimed LTC of a family member who was already dead. He was further found guilty of entering into another marriage in the lifetime of his first wife without obtaining written permission from the company. 4. In the domestic enquiry, the concerned workman was found guilty of the said charges and was awarded punishment form the dismissal of service. The concerned workman objected to the said decision of the management which led to a dispute and it was subsequently referred to the Labour Court, Bokaro in which, the impugned award was rendered upholding the punishment of dismissal. 5. The impugned award has been challenged by the Petitioner on the ground that the same is perverse and vitiated for non-observance of the principles of natural justice and for non-consideration of the relevant facts, materials and evidences on record. 6. Mr. K.P. Deo, learned Counsel appealing on behalf of Petitioner submitted that the finding on the bigamy is lopsided and without considering the fact that the concerned workman is a Muslim and second marriage is permissible under personal law and thus he is not guilty for contracting second marriage. He further submitted that it has come on record that he had given information about the marriage. The management should have treated the information as permission. He further submitted that it has come on record that he had given information about the marriage. The management should have treated the information as permission. Learned Labour Court has also relied upon the said statement of the workman to come to the finding that the second marriage was contracted without taking prior permission of the management. The other charges have also not been properly proved. Enquiring report was not furnished to the Petitioner and he was not given opportunity to explain the finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer. This was flagrant violation of principle of natural justice. The findings of learned Labour Court are without any basis, illegal and vitiated. 7. Mr. G.M. Mishra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of management submitted that the award of learned Labour Court is well considered and based on the evidence and legal reasons. There is no infirmity and illegality in the award. The finding of facts has been arrived at by learned Labour court on the basis of the thorough appraisal of the evidence. It has been submitted that adequate opportunity was given to the concerned workman in course of domestic enquiry. Learned Labour Court while deciding the preliminary issue held that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper. Learned Labour Court thus afforded full opportunity to the parties to establish their respective claims. Before the Labour Court, the concerned workman almost admitted all the charges by saying that Babujan Man was his father and he is not the son of Harkhu Man, in which name he secured employment against the displaced quota. He has also admitted to have contracted second marriage and for that he had said that he had informed the management. However, the concerned workman has not brought any evidence on record to show that he had obtained permission before contracting second marriage. It has also been established by the evidence that the concerned workman fraudulently claimed LTC against the person who was already dead. Learned Labour Court has found the concerned workman guilty of all the charges. The finding of facts cannot be interfered with by this Court in exercise of writ petition. The Petitioner failed to make out any legal ground for assailing the impugned award and as such writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. Learned Labour Court has found the concerned workman guilty of all the charges. The finding of facts cannot be interfered with by this Court in exercise of writ petition. The Petitioner failed to make out any legal ground for assailing the impugned award and as such writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered the facts and materials on record and perused the impugned award. I find that the award rendered by learned Labour Court is well considered and based on facts evidences and materials on record. The Labour Court has found the Petitioner guilty of three serious charges and held that there is no illegality in awarding punishment of dismissal of the concerned workman. 9. Mr. Deo, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner emphatically argued that the punishment is violative of principle of natural justice and perverse even on the admitted point that the enquiry report was not furnished to the delinquent. I find that the said ground was vigorously taken before learned Labour Court and the same has been discussed in detail. Learned Labour Court has held that the workman failed to show that any prejudice has been caused to him for not serving copy of the enquiry report. On the basis of the evidences on record it has been held that even after furnishing of the report there was no chance of any different consequence, it would not be in the interest of justice to promote such employee and allow to resume duty and to get all the consequential benefit. It would amount to rewarding the dishonest and guilty and stretching the concept of natural justice to unnatural extent which is antithetical to justice. 10. In my considered view, the materials on record do not lead to any different conclusion, I find no ground made out for interfering with the impugned award. This writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.