ORISSA ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY LTD Vs. LOKANATH PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Orissa Road transport Company, Ltd. , the employer of opposite party 1, is the petitioner in this writ application. The order of the Assistant labour Commissioner, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. rejecting an application under S. 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act), a copy of which is annexure 2 to the writ application, has been impugned in this case.

(2.) OPPOSITE party was serving under the petitioner as a driver. It is alleged that on 19 August 1978 at about 10. 15 a. m. while the traffic manager, Orissa Road Transport company, Berhampur, was on duty in his office, the opposite party I went into the office room of the said traffic manager without any prior permission and threatened him raising his fist and saying that the order passed by him against another employee should be modified. The traffic manager expressed his inability to comply with the request of opposite party 1 for which he became furious and shouted at the traffic manager threatening to throw him out of the premises. It was further alleged that opposite party 1 intimidated and attempted to assault the traffic manager. On these allegations, the police being informed registered a case against opposite party 1 for the offences under Ss. 448/189/506, Indian Penal Code and after investigation, a criminal case bearing G. R. Case No. 698 of 1978 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur, was initiated. Simultaneously a disciplinary proceeding against opposite party 1 was initiated by the management of the petitioner-company on the allegation that on the aforesaid date and time while the traffic manager was on duty in his office, the opposite party 1 intimidated and attempted to assault the traffic manager which constitutes a misconduct under CI. 14, Sub-cl. (13) of the modified standing order of the company. He was directed to explain as to why he should not be discharged or dismissed from service on the aforesaid charges. Opposite party I submitted his explanation on 1 January 1979 denying the charges levelled against him whereafter the Deputy Director, enforcement, was appointed as the enquiring officer. During the enquiry conducted by the aforesaid enquiring officer, some witnesses were examined on behalf of the management who were cross-examined by the delinquent opposite party 1.

(3.) THE enquiring officer submitted his report giving a finding that opposite party 1 was guilty of the charges of unruly and violent behaviour in the office of the traffic manager on the aforesaid date and time and the opposite party 1 was served with a second show-cause notice, dated 9 October 1979, calling upon him to explain as to why he should not be discharged or dismissed from the service of the company for the offence committed by him. Opposite party 1 submitted his explanation in response to the aforesaid notice denying the charges against him and stated that all the witnesses examined on behalf of the management being subordinates to the traffic manager, their evidence should not be accepted. The opposite party 1 prayed that he not being guilty of the charges levelled against him should be exonerated.