MANAGEMENT OF BANGALORE WOOLLEN COTTON AND SILK MILLS COMPANY LIMITED MANAGEMENT OF BANGALORE WOOLLEN COTTON AND SILK MILLS COMPANY LIMITED Vs. B DASAPPA M T
LAWS(SC)-1960-2-9
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
Decided on February 03,1960

MANAGEMENT OF THE BANGALORE WOOLLEN COTTON AND SILK MILLS COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MYSORE,B.DASAPPA,M.T.REPRESENTED BY THE BINNY MILLS LABOUR ASSOCIATION Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

BATA SHOE CO PR LTD VS. THIRD INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [LAWS(CAL)-1973-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY VS. REDAUL HUSSAIN KHAN [LAWS(GAU)-2010-5-18] [REFERRED TO]
WHATSAPP LLC VS. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2022-8-86] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN HOTEL COMPANY LTD VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1998-3-26] [REFERRED TOSC]
SAMPAT B G VS. STATE OF WEST BANGAL [LAWS(CAL)-1999-10-33] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. SH GIAN CHAND EX CONDUCTOR [LAWS(DLH)-2010-11-230] [REFERRED TO]
RAM KRISHNA AND SONS CHARITABLE TRUST LTD VS. IILM BUSINESS SCHOOL [LAWS(DLH)-2008-11-63] [REFERRED TO]
JAYANTA KUMAR GHOSH VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2010-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL GAS AGENCIES VS. MANOHAR SHRAWAN DONGRE [LAWS(BOM)-2007-12-60] [REFERRED TO]
DIVISIONAL MANAGER & AUTHORIZED DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY VS. RAMESHWAR LAL AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-6-6] [REFERRED TO]
G P JOSHI VS. RAJ FINANCIAL CORP [LAWS(RAJ)-2019-1-117] [REFERRED TO]
W VS. H & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2016-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. II [LAWS(DLH)-2014-4-393] [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM MILLS COMPANY LTD VS. INDUSTRIAL COURT N A VYAS [LAWS(GJH)-1963-8-11] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT MOHAN RATESHWAR VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-12-9] [REFERRED TO]
COCHIN SHIPYARD LTD VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [LAWS(KER)-2006-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
DIVISIONAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED DISCIPLINARY OFFICER RSRTC VS. SHRI SHABIR SHAH [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-7-194] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVA SHANKAR VERMA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2011-8-14] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVA SHANKAR VERMA VS. USHA VERMA [LAWS(PAT)-2011-8-84] [REFERRED TO]
JINDAL RECTIFIERS VS. JINDAL POWER [LAWS(P&H)-2021-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT [LAWS(DLH)-1972-1-5] [REFERRED TO]
AJUDHIA TEXTILE MILLS LTD VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-1969-1-6] [REFERRED TO]
ICICI BANK LTD VS. MAIKAAL FIBRES LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2004-11-14] [REFERRED TO]
JIBANGSHU PAUL,S/O LATE NALINI PAUL VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY [LAWS(GAU)-2011-7-85] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. HANSRAJ M CHUDASAMA [LAWS(GJH)-2004-8-43] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. PALE RAM [LAWS(DLH)-2016-11-50] [REFERRED TO]
G K SENGUPTA VS. HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-1994-2-69] [REFERRED]
OINAM MONITON SINGHA VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY [LAWS(GAU)-2012-10-58] [REFERRED TO]
POONNAMMA VISHWANATHAN VS. MOOLCHAND KHAIRATI RAM HOSPITAL & AYURVEDIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE [LAWS(DLH)-2018-12-235] [REFERRED TO]
TRUSTEES OF "TRIBUNE" VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [LAWS(P&H)-1961-2-4] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED VS. P.N.SURENDRAN NAIR [LAWS(KER)-2020-2-389] [REFERRED TO]
JAYPRAKASH SAHEBRAO SURYAWANSHI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [LAWS(BOM)-2018-7-168] [REFERRED TO]
AKHILESH KUMAR SINGH @ MANOJ KUMAR VS. THE UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(PAT)-2016-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
REDAUL HUSSAIN KHAN VS. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY [LAWS(GAU)-2012-9-23] [REFERRED TO]
TRAVANCORE SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD VS. M K VASUDEVAN PILLAI [LAWS(KER)-1968-11-18] [REFERRED TO]
NIRMALA J. JHALA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2013-3-40] [REFERRED TO]
K DURGA PRASAD VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT [LAWS(APH)-2010-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGING DIRECTOR BRAKES INDIA LTD VS. S PACKIARAJ [LAWS(MAD)-2006-1-174] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Das Gupta, J. - (1.)On January 1956 when a reference was pending before an Industrial Tribunal of a dispute between the Management of the Bangalore Wollen Cotton and Silk Mills Co., Ltd., the appellant in both the appeals and its workmen, an application was made by the Management under S. 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act for permission for discharge of Dasappa, the respondent in both the appeals. It was stated in the application that on an information being received that Dasappa had dishonestly removed property belonging to the Company a charge-sheet was framed against him and an enquiry held in which on a consideration of all the evidence the Manager came to the conclusion that the respondent was guilty of the charge made against him, which justified an order of discharge. This application was opposed by the Workers' Union on behalf of the Respondent, Dasappa and it was stated that the allegation of theft made against Dasappa was false and that the finding of the Manager was arbitrary and opposed to the principles of natural justice.
(2.)The Industrial Tribunal on a consideration of the evidence of the witnesses examined by the Manager and also of two witnesses examined before it, formally recorded its conclusion in these words:"Having regard to all the material placed before us we cannot accept the conclusion of the Manager and we hold that no prima facie case of theft is established against the respondent with the result that we cannot grant the permission for discharging the respondent."
(3.)Against this order of dismissal the appellant moved a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution for the issue of an appropriate writ or directions after quashing the Tribunal's order. This petition was dismissed by the Mysore High Court on September 27, 1957.
;


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