CHANDRAKANT B DHUMAL Vs. D M KHODADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition challenges the award of the Labour court rejecting the Reference for reinstatement with continuity of service and full backwages.

(2.) The facts involved in the present case are as follows: the Petitioner was employed as an Electrician with respondent No. 1 company since 1.11.1976. He claimed to be an active member of the union representing the workmen employed with Respondent-Company. On 4.2.1989, he was issued a chargesheet wherein several acts of misconduct had been alleged aginst his reply to the chargesheet, the petitioner denied all the allegations made against him. As his explanation not found to be satisfactory, an enquiry was conducted. against him. Several witnesses were examined at the enquiry. The enquiry officer submitted his report on 16.7.1989 holding the petitioner guilty of three out of the. 15 charges levelled against officer held that it was established that the petitioner had conducted a meeting of workers near the canteen On 28.1.1989 between 1.50- pm and 2.10 pm without the permission of the authorities. The Enquiry Officer further came to the conclusion that the Petitioner had used abusive and indecent language against - the respondent company and its officials.-A further charge which was proved. against the Petitioner was that he had conducted a meeting of workers after 4.30 pm on 1.2.1989 and that the participants had used indecent and abusive language towards the company by shouting slogans and metres from the company premises oy obstructing tne , factory gate, thereby committing a. breach of orders of the Industrial Court. On 31.7.1990, the Petitioner was dismissed from service as the respondent company accpted the enquiry report submitted and took punitive action against the Petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, raised an industrial dispute which was referred for adjudication in Reference (IDA) No,26 of 1991.

(3.) The enquiry held against the petitioner was found to be fair and proper by the Labour Court as the petitioner did not challenge the fairness of the enquiry. On 15.4.1996, by award part IT, the Labour court dismissed the Reference by concluding that the findings recorded by the enquiry officer were not preverse. The Labour Court also held that the misconduct having been proved, the punishment imposed on the Petitioner, of dismissal, was not disproportionate. is this award which has been challenged in the present petition.