- (1.) The writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein the award dated 26.02.2016 passed in Reference Case No.20 of 2002, is under challenge, whereby and whereunder reference has been made to the effect "whether the dismissal of Shri P.B. Lal, (petitioner) Personal No.146373, Senior Conductor Tisco Ltd. Jamshedpur by the management is justified? If what relief he is entitled to? The same has been answered against the petitioner/workman, against that this writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that he was selected for Trade Apprentice Trainee Session 1988-1991 and thereafter, he was employed, subsequently his services were confirmed, while in service a memorandum of charge dated 24th May, 1999 has been served upon him on 29.05.1999 alleging therein the following allegations:- "You are hereby asked to show-cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against you for following act which amounts to misconduct within the meaning of standing orders no-23 for which you are liable to be punished under standing order no.-24 of the works Standing Orders. You are either on approved leave or absented from the duty for the following periods. Month Approved leave Absent from duty October-98 26 th 13th, 14th, 22nd December-98 7th-13th (7days), 28th-31st (4days) 2nd, 3rd, 17th January-99 18th-21st (4days) 14th, 30th Feb.-99 8th-11th (4days), 16th-28th (13days) March-99 1st-25th (25days) (Co As for 22 days) It has been reported that even though you were on leave/absent during the above periods. You has obtained your attendance by raising certificate of attendance for the above periods and forging signature of authorized signatories and the rubber stamp of the Sr. Divisional Manager Coke plant-2. The above act on your part amounts to dishonesty and forgery with the company, which is a serious misconduct per the order no.-23 of the Company's Standing Orders. You are allowed 48 hours from the date of receipt to give your explanations. Any representation that you may make in this connection will be taken into consideration before passing orders".
(3.) The petitioner has submitted his reply partially admitting the guilt and partially denying it thereafter, he was subjected to domestic inquiry, in which, he has been provided with an opportunity of hearing, he has been allowed to cross-examine the witnesses as also the witnesses of the management and the domestic inquiry has been concluded by submitting a report proving the charge against him, the disciplinary authority as per the power conferred under certifying order applicable to the petitioner has passed the order of punishment for dismissal which has been disputed by the petitioner by making appropriate application before the appropriate government for raising the dispute under the provision of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which ultimately has been resulted into a reference by virtue of notification issued by the appropriate government as contained in notification no.1731 dated 30.05.2002 which has been answered against the workman which is under challenge in this writ petition.;