Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Ughal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2.
(2.) In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the notification dated 03.07.1999 as contained in S.O. No. 7/L.D.-12013/98 LE &T 2277, issued by the Government of Bihar, Department of Labour, Employment and Training, whereby and whereunder the dispute has been referred to the Labour Court at Jamshedpur for adjudication under Section 10(i)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings in connection with Reference Case No. 10 of 1999 pending before the Labour Court, Jamshedpur including the order dated 06.03.2006 whereby it has been held that the domestic enquiry was not valid as it was conducted in violation of the principles of natural justice and the finding of the Enquiry Officer was not fair and proper.
(3.) The case of the management as would appear from the writ application is that the petitioner has its Standing Orders duly certified under the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 which provides for disciplinary procedure and illustrative list of misconducts. In accordance with the provisions of the standing orders when an employee is charged for an act of misconduct an enquiry is held by giving the concerned employee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The respondent no. 2 was offered employment on 15.05.1965 as unskilled mate grade II in the Gen, M.C. Shop in the works of the petitioner's company on daily wages which offer of employment was accepted along with all the terms and conditions, consequent to which the respondent no. 2 was appointed as a daily wager and he joined on 17.05.1965. A charge sheet was issued to the respondent no. 2 on 12.11.1966 on account of his continuous absence from duty without leave since 29.10.1966 which is a misconduct in terms of Clause 24 (XI) of the Works Standing Orders of the petitioner's company. An Enquiry Officer was also appointed to enquire into the charges levelled against the respondent no. 2.;