Decided on February 04,2020

Vice President, Emami Paper Mills Ltd. Appellant


S.K.SAHOO,J. - (1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to quash the impugned order dated 08.05.2015 (Annexure-4) passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Case No.428 of 1995 in deciding the preliminary issue against the first party management (petitioner in the writ petition) and holding that the domestic enquiry conducted against the second party workman (opposite party no.2 in the writ petition) was not valid. A further prayer has been made in the writ petition to quash the award dated 30.10.2018 (Annexure-5) directing the first party management to reinstate the second party workman in service with full back wages along with all other consequential service benefits within one month from publication of the award by the Government, failing which the second party would be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the monetary benefit.
(2.) The reference which was made on 04.12.1995 by the Government of Odisha, Labour and Employment Department in exercise of the power conferred upon it by sub-section (5) of section 12 read with clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereafter 'I.D. Act') to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar for adjudication is as follows: 'Whether the action of the management of M/s. Emami Paper Mills Ltd., Balgopalpur, Balasore in dismissing Sri Muralidhar Das, Helper from service w.e.f. 10.11.1994 is legal and/or justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?'
(3.) It is the case of the opp. party no.2 workman that he was appointed as helper in the establishment of the petitioner w.e.f. August 1991. He along with other workers associated to form a new Trade Union in the name of Emami Sramik Karmachari Sangha for which the management became vindictive and took action against him to victimize on illegal and fabricated charges and suspended him during lock out period by way of unfair labour practice. He was charge sheeted on 06.05.1994 and also suspended on that day just before unauthorized lock out. He prayed to issue odia charge sheet to submit his reply but the management did not issue the same and despite that he denied the charges and agreed to appear in the enquiry with his representative, but the management did not allow his representative though the management appointed one Advocate as an Enquiry Officer. It is the further case of the opposite party no.2 that the Enquiry Officer was partial to the management and basing upon the ex-parte enquiry, the petitioner management dismissed him from service. The opposite party no.2 prayed to set aside the enquiry and cancel the dismissal order with a further prayer to reinstate him in service with all service benefits.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.