THE SIRSA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. Vs. THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
LAWS(P&H)-2001-12-132
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 18,2001

SIRSA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD Appellant
VERSUS
PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, HISSAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Writ Petition seeks issuance of writ of Certiorari quashing the award dated 15.1.2001 under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) Respondent No. 2-Workman was issued a charge sheet on 26.11.1984 for embezzlement of an amount of Rs. 88,538.86. The workman being an employee of a Cooperative Society, the dispute was referred to an Arbitrator. On 10.11.1984, the Arbitrator held the workman responsible for embezzlement. Thereafter, a domestic enquiry was conducted and the workman was found guilty of the charges. On 7.8.1985 the workman was ordered to be dismissed from service. Additional Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana allowed the appeal filed by the workman and set aside the order dismissing the workman from service. Thereafter, second show cause notice was issued to the workman on 21.10.1986. The matter was placed before the Board of Directors on 9.1.1986. It was resolved that the workman shall pledge five acres of land within 15 days as security against the alleged amount and deposit the amount with interest upto 30.4.1987. The workman failed to pledge the land or to make payment. Consequently, the Board of Directors of the Bank again ordered the dismissal of the Workman from service on 1.5.1987. On 25.4.1994, the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana dismissed the appeal of respondent No. 2 and upheld the order of dismissal. On 11.5.1996, the workman served a demand notice on the Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Management). Consequently, the matter was referred by the Haryana Government to the Labour Court. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar (hereinafter referred to as the Labour Court) by its award dated 15.1.2001 held that the order of termination was not justified. The workman has been directed to be reinstated in service with continuity and 50 per cent back wages from the date of demand notice till reinstatement.
(3.) Mr. Lohan has submitted that the respondent-workman could not have been reinstated into service as he had been charge-sheeted for embezzlement. Learned Counsel has also submitted that even if reinstatement was to be ordered, the workman could not have been granted any back wages as the reference was sought by the workman after the period of two years of the dismissal of the appeal by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana on 25.4.1984.;


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