S.S. Nijjar, J. - (1.) THIS petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeks issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the Award Annexure P -1 dated 23.3.1998, made by respondent No. 1.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated that facts as pleaded and narrated by the Ld. Sr. Counsel for the parties may be noticed. The petitioner was appointed as operator in the Frame Assembly Department of M/s Hero Honda Motors Ltd. Delhi Jaipur Highway, Dharuhcra, Distt. Rewari (respondent No. 2), on 25.8.1986. He was in service of respondent No. 2 from 25.8.1986 to 11.9.1989. The petitioner is stated to be an enthusiastic trade union worker. He is alleged to have been victimised on account of his enthusiastic trade union activity which was legitimate and within the permissible parameters of law. The service of the petitioner were terminated by means of an order of dismissal from service dated 8.8.1989. This order was not served on the petitioner. The order was passed without serving any charge -sheet or affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No domestic enquiry was held against the petitioner prior to the passing of the order of dismissal,
(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the genesis of the whole dispute started in July 1989 when a proposal was mooted within the Labour Union of Workers of respondent No. 2 that their Union should be affiliated to the Hind Mazdoor Sabha. This was not relished by respondent No. 2. The Union of workmen of respondent No. 2 had taken a collective decision after due deliberation to officially affiliate the Labour Union with Hind Mazdoor Sabha on 18.7.1989. On that date, a flag of the Hind Mazdoor Sabha was to be hoisted alongwith the Union Flag at the main gate of factory of respondent No. 2. Therefore, on 15.7.1989 to prevent the hoisting of the flag, respondent No. 2 got the President of the Labour Union and other Trade Union leaders arrested on false charges. As a result of these arrests the date of affiliation was postponed to 23.7.1989 which was Sunday and a weekly off -day of the majority of the workmen of respondent No. 2. In order to stall the affiliation respondent No. 2 concocted various episodes of mis -conduct against the petitioner and other active trade union workers on 15th of July, 17th of July and 19th of July, 1989. By misusing their influence with the local police, respondent No. 2 got a proclamation under Section 144 Cr. P.C. also issued in Dharuhera on 23.7.89 which banned the assembly of more than five persons at any place within Dharuhera. Additionally, a large number of police was deployed on 23.7.89 inside the factory of respondent No. 2 as well as outside. In the same scheme of events, respondent No. 2 had got a false and concocted FIR registered against the petitioner and 18 other workmen on 19th of July, 1989. In that case, the prosecution evidence has not been completed due to dilatory tactics adopted by respondent No. 2. The petitioner and other workmen are being prosecuted under Sections 147, 323, 149 and 506 IPC. According to the petitioner, the orgy of victimization of the petitioner has been continued by respondent No. 2 with unabated ruthlessness by taking the extreme step of dismissal from service on concocted charges without holding a domestic enquiry inspite of the fact that no special circumstances , as envisaged by Standing Order No. 31.12 existed to render holding of domestic enquiry not feasible. There is a provision in Certified Standing Orders of respondent No. 2 for suspending a delinquent workmen in Clause 31.3. The Management deliberately did not exercise the power of suspension. Instead the petitioner was ordered to be dismissed from service by an order dated 8.8.1989, without issuing any charge -sheet or holding a departmental enquiry. The petitioner served a demand notice on 8.11.1989. In the meantime, the Union had entered into a settlement with the Management of respondent No. 2 on 11.9.1989. Relevant part of Clause 6 of the settlement is as under : - "6. Both the parties agreed that 14 workmen against whom there are charges of serious misconduct have been dismissed from the services of the company and 40 workmen against whom there are charges of misconduct have been suspended and disciplinary action against whom would continue. With the exception of these 54 workmen, rest of workmen, whose names were on the muster roll of the company will report on work on 11th September, 89.";