WORKMEN BHARAT FRITZ WERNER PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. BHARAT FRITZ WERNERP LIMITED:WORKMEN OF BHARAT FRITZ WERNER PRIVATE LIMITED
LAWS(SC)-1990-2-45
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
Decided on February 16,1990

WORKMEN,BHARAT FRITZ WERNER PRIVATE LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
BHARAT FRITZ WERNERPRIVATE LIMITED,WORKMEN OF BHARAT FRITZ WERNER PRIVATE LIMITED Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

PREM CHAND VS. MANAGEMENT OF JOINT DIRECTOR INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS [LAWS(DLH)-2008-2-308] [REFERRED TO]
ON DOT COURIERS AND CARGO LTD VS. ANAND SINGH RAWAT [LAWS(DLH)-2009-10-202] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. DINESH SAVJIBHAI PIPALIA [LAWS(GJH)-2000-5-52] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. K G LABANA [LAWS(GJH)-2000-5-74] [REFERRED]
HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-1992-11-102] [REFERRED TO]
U P STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION KANPUR REGION VS. BABU SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2003-4-241] [REFERRED TO]
CEMENT CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. STATE OF H P [LAWS(HPH)-1994-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
DIBESH CHANDRA CHOUDHURY VS. O N G C DEHRADUN [LAWS(GAU)-1997-5-5] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF ALLAHABAD VS. ALLAHABAD BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION [LAWS(GAU)-2003-5-32] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF TEOK TEA ESTATE VS. LABOUR COURT DIBRUGARH [LAWS(GAU)-2005-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
BALACHANDRA REDDY P VS. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(APH)-1993-12-10] [REFERRED TO]
B N K JAIN VS. LABOUR COURT HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1998-9-60] [REFERRED TO]
BALASORE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD VS. KARUNAKAR DAS [LAWS(ORI)-1994-3-21] [REFERRED TO]
MYSORE PRESS PRIVATE LIMITED BANGALORE VS. WORKMEN OF MYSORE PRESS PRIVATE LIMITED BANGALORE [LAWS(KAR)-1997-3-19] [REFERRED TO]
AIR LANKA LTD VS. JOHN WILLIAM NATHAN AND ANOTHER [LAWS(MAD)-1990-8-49] [REFERRED TO]
M ARUNACHALAM VS. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(MAD)-1996-12-7] [REFERRED TO]
E MERCK INDIA LIMITED VS. V N PARULEKAR [LAWS(BOM)-1990-11-14] [REFERRED TO]
RATANSINH SODANSINH SISIDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-1997-1-25] [REFERRED TO]
U P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT RAMPUR [LAWS(ALL)-2003-3-119] [REFERRED TO]
M A RASHEED VS. PRESIDING OFFICER INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT [LAWS(APH)-2011-7-11] [REFERRED TO]
KOTTARAKARA CO OP URBAN BANK LTD VS. SREENIVASAN [LAWS(KER)-1990-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
LARSEN AND TOUBRO LTD VS. RAJNIKANT RAGHUNATH BELEKAR [LAWS(BOM)-1991-6-6] [REFERRED TO]
GOA BOTTLING CO PRIVATE LIMITED VS. PRADEEP SARDESSAI [LAWS(BOM)-1991-9-15] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH A KERKAR VS. S V NEVAGI [LAWS(BOM)-1994-8-44] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK MUKUNDRAI TRIVEDI VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY [LAWS(BOM)-1995-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
USV LIMITED VS. MAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION [LAWS(BOM)-1997-7-83] [REFERRED TO]
M VISVESVARYA INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTRE VS. DILIP MADHAVRAO VAIDYA [LAWS(BOM)-1997-7-106] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY VS. HANUMANT JOTIRAM MANE [LAWS(BOM)-1998-2-19] [REFERRED TO]
BAVANI V VS. PRESIDING OFFICER LABOUR COURT [LAWS(MAD)-2002-12-199] [REFERRED TO]
S SHANMUGAM VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(MAD)-2004-11-146] [REFERRED TO]
MOOL CHANDRA AGRAWAL VS. JIWAJI UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MPH)-1992-3-5] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT [LAWS(MPH)-1995-8-27] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION VS. U S V LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2001-7-87] [REFERRED TO]
BREACH CANDY HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE MUMBAI VS. BABULAL B PARDESHI [LAWS(BOM)-2001-7-115] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT OF C M C AND HOSPITAL VS. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT [LAWS(MAD)-2006-3-327] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAKANT B DHUMAL VS. ADVANI OERLIKON LIMITED [LAWS(BOM)-2004-10-94] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARASHTRA GENERAL KAMGAR UNION VS. PAM PHARMACEUTICALS AND ALLIED MACHINERY CO LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2005-2-137] [REFERRED TO]
SAVATRAM RAMPRASAD MILLS VS. MEMBER INDUSTRIAL COURT OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2006-1-29] [REFERRED TO]
JAYANT DHIRAJLAL KACHALIA VS. DOWELLS ELECTRO WORKS [LAWS(BOM)-2007-1-6] [REFERRED TO]
SUKANYABEN G VAKIL VS. RASIKLAL T DALAL [LAWS(BOM)-2007-4-189] [REFERRED TO]
VIDYA V KULKARNI VS. BOMBAY KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION [LAWS(BOM)-2007-4-42] [REFERRED TO]
JAGANNATH VS. WOKHARDT LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2010-6-181] [REFERRED TO]
DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER VS. ANWAR HAMID [LAWS(BOM)-2007-2-164] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB FINANCIAL CORP VS. UNION TERRITORY [LAWS(P&H)-1990-12-12] [REFERRED TO]
DHARAM SINGH EX-CONSTABLE VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1994-1-41] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZER CORPORATION LTD VS. P O LABOUR COURT CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-1998-7-99] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND VS. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL [LAWS(RAJ)-1998-12-5] [REFERRED TO]
HARDWARI LAL VS. HINDUSTAN MACHINE TOOLS [LAWS(P&H)-2009-2-24] [REFERRED TO]
ASSEMLY OF GOD HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE VS. 1ST INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2002-1-46] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESHWAR SINGH VS. MANAGEMENT OF M/S. INDOMAG STEEL TECHNOLOGY LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2014-1-214] [REFERRED TO]
RANCHI VS. THEIR WORK MEN REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, JHARKHAND COLLIERY MAZDOOR SANGH, HAZARIBAGH [LAWS(JHAR)-2012-1-56] [REFERRED TO]
D.C. AGGARWAL VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-1991-4-127] [REFERRED TO]
E. MOHAMMED HUSSAIN VS. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-6-180] [REFERRED TO]
AKHIL BHARATIYA CHAH MAZDOOR SANGHA VS. MANAGEMENT OF NAMRUP T.E. AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2015-9-30] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SARAN VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, U.T. CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-1996-4-169] [REFERRED]
CEMENT FACTORY MAZDOOR SANGH, BANMORE VS. BANMORE CEMENT WORKS [LAWS(MPH)-1995-4-68] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAKANT B DHUMAL VS. D M KHODADE [LAWS(BOM)-2004-10-188] [REFERRED]
E MERCK INDIA LIMITED VS. V N PARULEKAR [LAWS(BOM)-1990-11-72] [REFERRED]
SAMPAT SAKHARAM WABLE VS. AMAR DYE CHEM LTD., & ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-1992-12-57] [REFERRED TO]
BREACH CANDY HOSPITAL VS. BABULAL B. PARDESHI [LAWS(BOM)-2001-6-128] [REFERRED TO]
RATTAN CHAND HARJAS RAI (MOULDINGS) PVT LTD , FARIDABAD VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-1991-12-151] [REFERRED]
PGI, CHANDIGARH VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, U T CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-1996-5-316] [REFERRED]
KASHMIR SINGH VS. DIRECTOR, STATE TRANSPORT, PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2009-11-229] [REFERRED]
LANCERS CONVENT SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL VS. JAI PRAKASH [LAWS(DLH)-2018-3-138] [REFERRED TO]
P N RAVINDER VS. MANAGEMENT OF M R F LIMITED [LAWS(MAD)-2019-3-94] [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE VS. PREM SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2019-4-131] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATED SERVICE STATION VS. JAI KISHEN SHARMA [LAWS(DLH)-2019-5-146] [REFERRED TO]
NANAK CHAND VS. INDIAN PORTS ASSOCIATION [LAWS(DLH)-2019-5-175] [REFERRED TO]
AIR INDIA LTD VS. SANJAY KAURA [LAWS(DLH)-2019-7-26] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDA TIWARI VS. DIRECTORATE OF SOCIAL WELFARE [LAWS(DLH)-2019-7-40] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION VS. MADAN MOHAN [LAWS(DLH)-2019-7-113] [REFERRED TO]
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VS. JASWANT SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2019-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI STATE CIVIL SUPPLY CORPORATION LTD VS. BADAN SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2019-8-267] [REFERRED TO]
SMITHA VS. KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(KER)-2020-3-577] [REFERRED TO]
SMITHA VS. KERALA CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL THIRUVANANTHAPURAM [LAWS(KER)-2020-3-650] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

S. C. Agrawal, J. - (1.)These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka dated July 27, 1984 in Writ Appeals Nos. 2383 and 2384 of 1982 and Writ Appeals Nos. 4660 and 4661 of 1982 arising out of Writ Petitions Nos. 866 and 12959 of 1982. Civil Appeals Nos. 4784-4785 (NL) of 1984 have been filed by the workmen of Bharat Fritz Werner (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Workmen) whereas Civil Appeals Nos. 4780-4783 (NL) of 1984 have been filed by the Management of Bharat Fritz Werner (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Management).
(2.)Bharat Fritz Werner (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company) has a factory at Peenya, Bangalore. On March 8, 1978, the Management issued, a notice in connection with the recruitment of "Supervisors" for machine shop, from internal candidates, whereby it was indicated that persons who have passed S.S.L.C. and have at least 7 years of experience in machine shop would be eligible for recruitment. The said notice created resentment amongst the workmen. On March 10, 1978 a number of workers entered the office of the President of the Company. The case of the Management is that the workers terrorised the President and wrongfully confined him in his office and compelled him to withdraw the notice date March 8, 1978. On March 11, 1978 Charge-sheet- cum-Enquiry Notices containing the following charges were issued to 19 workmen:
"Whereas you......................along with 18 other at about 2.30 p.m. on Friday the 10th March, 1978 trespassed into my office with out my permission and there terrorised me and wrongfully confined me refusing to allow me to go and compelled me to withdraw the Notice No.BFW/ PERS/ 1 A 78, dated 8th March, 1978 regarding recruitment of Super visors, and thereby you have committed a misconduct within the meaning of sub-clauses 2,5, 6 and 12 of Clause 26 of the Standing Order of the Company."

(3.)By the said notice the concerned workmen were informed that an enquiry would be held into the above misconduct and the Enquiry Officer was appointed for that purpose. The workmen did not appear before the Enquiry Officer and he conducted the proceedings ex parte. He recorded the statements of seven witnesses (MWs 1 to 7). The Management also produced documentary evidence (Ex M 1 to M 128). The Enquiry Officer submitted his report on April 7, 1978, wherein he found 15 out of the 19 workmen guilty of the charge of misconduct. On the basis of the report of the Enquiry Officer, the Management passed orders dated April 7, 1978 whereby the 15 workmen who were found guilty of misconduct by the Enquiry officer were dismissed from service. As an industrial dispute between the Management and the Workmen was pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, the Management made an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) for approval of the action taken against these 15 workmen. During the pendency of that application, the Government of Karnataka, by order dated May 15, 1978, referred for adjudication, the dispute between the Workmen and the Management with regard to dismissal of the 15 workmen to the Additional Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'). Before the Tribunal the case of the Workmen was that the domestic enquiry held ex parte against them is illegal and is neither fair nor proper. The Tribunal framed the following issue which was taken up as preliminary issue: Whether the domestic enquiry conducted against the 15 workmen named in the order of reference has been fair and proper and in accordance with the standing orders of the 11-party and principles of natural justice
;


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