- (1.) This reference to the Full Bench has been occasioned by a referring order dated 25 January 2005 of a learned Single Judge. Facts
(2.) The petitioner manufactured, at the material time, detergent bars in a factory at Orai. The three workmen to whom the proceedings relate were suspended on 5 December 1998 pending a disciplinary enquiry on the allegation that they had committed acts of misconduct within the premises of the factory on 5 December 1998. By the order of suspension they were directed, during the period of suspension to mark their attendance on all working days at 11.00 am in a register maintained for that purpose at the security office at the main gate of the factory. Charge sheets were issued on 11 December 1998. The workmen did not mark their attendance as directed by the employer in the order of suspension. The employer paid to the workmen subsistence allowance only for the days on which they had marked their attendance in the register kept at the factory gate. On 27 April 2000, the State Government suo motu referred an industrial dispute under Section 4 (k) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to the Industrial Tribunal-III at Kanpur Industrial Tribunal. The issue which was referred for adjudication was whether the refusal to pay subsistence allowance to the workmen from 6 December 1998, save and except for those days on which they had marked their attendance, was illegal and contrary to law. The Industrial Tribunal by its award dated 13 March 2003 held that the direction to the suspended employees to mark their attendance at the factory gate during the period of suspension was unjustified and illegal. The employer was directed to pay subsistence allowance to the workmen for the whole of the period of suspension including the days on which attendance was not marked by them. This award was challenged in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(3.) The issues raised;