- (1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Award dated 20.06.2007 (Annexure P-12), whereby an Industrial Dispute raised by the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as workman), was answered in favour of the workman.
(2.) It is the case of the workman that he was appointed as a Conductor in the year 1996. But his services were terminated on 21.04.1982 on the basis of departmental enquiry, which was not legal, fair, and proper. Thus, the workman claimed for setting aside of his termination and reinstatement with continuity of service. The Management in its reply to the statement of claim before the learned Labour Court, took up a stand that the workman has earlier filed a Civil Suit to challenge his termination vide order dated 21.04.1982. The said suit was dismissed. Once the suit challenging the termination stands dismissed, the workman is estopped by his own conduct from filing the present reference. It was also pointed out that services of the workman were terminated on 21.04.1982 after conducting regular departmental enquiry in respect of charge of misconduct, of not issuing tickets to passengers on collecting fare from them when he was on route from Amritsar to Ranian on 14.01.1981. Earlier, the workman was placed under suspension and a regular enquiry was conducted. The workman was given proper opportunity of hearing. The Enquiry Officer gave its finding against the workman and after considering the reply to the show cause notice served on conclusion of the enquiry, the order of termination was passed.
(3.) While adjudicating reference an dispute raised by the workman, the learned Labour Court found that the Civil Suit was dismissed in default and therefore, invocation of jurisdiction of the remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the Act"), is not barred. However, the learned Labour Court on merits held that the enquiry stands vitiated as the workman was not given reasonable opportunity to defend his case.;