- (1.) The petitioner impugns the award dated 20.6.2011. His services having been terminated he claimed a reference under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and the following question was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication:- Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India, Amritsar to impose the punishment of dismissal from service of Shri Krishan Swaroop Sharma, Ex-Peon w.e.f. 17.12.1993 is legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and from which date An inquiry was conducted against the petitioner preceding his termination on the allegations that he had presented a forged account book number pertaining to one Arjun Singh and subsequently he had presented a withdrawal slip of Rs. 8,900 with the said account by forging the signatures of the deceased account holder and used the amount for his own benefit. The inquiry officer returned a finding against the petitioner and likewise on evaluation of the material before it, the Industrial Tribunal upheld the order of termination by concluding that there was no flaw in the inquiry or procedure leading to his termination.
(2.) Making a grievance of the said award, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the entire finding of the Tribunal rests on the alleged confessional statement made by him before the witness of the management one Sh. Jaitley who was examined as MW1. He contends that this confessional statement was obtained from him under duress and coercion and could not be relied upon.
(3.) That being the sole argument raised before this Court, the Court examined the same in the backdrop of the facts and the discussion recorded in the impugned order. An. elaborate reference has been made to the testimony of MW1 on the basis of which the enquiry officer returned a finding against the petitioner and the entire trail regarding the illegal transaction of which the petitioner was accused of has been traced to the petitioner. He has been unable to explain as to how his signatures were appended to the various documents prepared prior to the said illegal transaction. No explanation was offered before the inquiry officer or the Tribunal or before this Court to explain as to how all these documents namely ledger, pass book, withdrawal slip etc. were prepared in the handwriting of the petitioner and then eventually how the amount of Rs. 8,900 found its way to the account of the petitioner which he subsequently deposited. In view of the above, when the petitioner has not been able to explain satisfactorily the aforesaid facts, I am of the considered opinion that no interference is warranted in the findings recorded by the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court. Chandigarh moreso, when no substantive legal argument has been raised before this Court. Hence, Dismissed.;