2004(6) Supreme 509
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Guwahati High Court)
N. Santosh Hegde, S.B. Sinha & A.K. Mathur, JJ.
Management of Krishnakali Tea Estate -Appellant
versus
Akhil Bharatiya Chah Mazdoor Sangh & Anr. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2194 of 2001
Decided on 10-9-2004
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : B. Sen and K.R. Choudhary, Sr. Advocates, Janaranjan Das, Sweteketu Mishra, Ms. Moushumi Gahlot, Advocates.
For the Respondents : D.K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate, Sudhir Kumar Gupta and Anurag Pandey, Advocates.
(ii) LABOUR LAW-Order of dismissal on a charge of workmen having gheraoed the Manager while armed with lethal weapons and caused damage to property-Acquittal of workmen in criminal trial-In Labour Court evidence led by management was different from that led by prosecution in criminal case-It was open to Labour Court to have come to an independent conclusion de hors finding of Criminal Court. (Para 25)
(iii) LABOUR LAW-Punishment of dismissal from service-Charge was that workmen entered the estate armed with deadly weapons, gheraoed Manager and caused damage to property of estate-Charge was grave enough to attract punishment of dismissal and could not be said to be disproportionate to misconduct proved against workmen. (Para 27)
JUDGMENT
Santosh Hegde, J.-This appeal by leave of this Court is preferred against judgment and order dated 8th of February 2000 made by the Gauhati High Court in Writ Appeal No. 519 of 1997 confirming an order of the learned Single Judge of the same court in Civil Rule No. 1485 of 1992 dated 19th July, 1997. The original writ petition was filed by the first respondent herein against an award made by the Labour Court dated 21st of August 1991 which award upheld the decision of the appellant-management to dismiss the concerned workmen on the ground of proved misconduct.
2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows:
Concerned workmen who are represented by the first respondent herein were in the employment of the appellant-management which was managing a Tea Estate. It is the case of the management that in pursuance to a demand for bonus of 20 made by the workmen which was not acceded to by the management, certain workers came in a mob on the night of 12th/13th of October 1980 to the bungalow of Manager of the Tea Estate, armed with lethal weapons such as lathis, bows and arrows and axes and they gheraoed the Manager and others and by threat demanded bonus at the rate of 20 as against 8.33 offered by the management. The gherao according to the management continued till 3.00 AM on 13.10.1980. It is also alleged that on being informed, the police, Bilasipara arrived at the Estate but the mob consisting the workmen became violent and damaged the bungalow and other property of the Estate. It is also alleged that during the wrongful confinement of the Manager, he was compelled to sign a document, agreeing to pay 20 bonus. It is based on the above allegations, a domestic enquiry was instituted against the concerned workmen and after the enquiry, on the report of the Enquiry Officer, the workmen concerned were dismissed from service. Pursuant to the said decision, an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short, the Act ) seeking approval of the Labour Court of the action of the management in dismissing the concerned workmen was filed. The Labour Court at Gauhati approved the action of the management in dismissing the concerned workmen on 30th July, 1983.
3. Nearly 7 years after the order of dismissal i.e. on 4.3.1987 a reference under Section 10 of the Act was made by the concerned Government referring a dispute to adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal, Assam (Labour Court). The said dispute pertained to the justification of the order of the management in dismissing the concerned workmen as also to the question of entitlement of the workmen for re-instatement with full back wages in the event of the Labour Court coming to the conclusion that the dismissal was not justified.
4. On receipt of the Govt. notification the Labour Court issued noticed to the parties calling upon them to file written statement and documents on which they intended to rely. Accordingly, the parties filed their written statement and documents.
5. The case of the management before the Labour Court also, as stated above, is that on the night of 12th and 13th October 1980 the workmen concerned along with others came to the Estate, armed with deadly weapons and confined the Manager and others from 8.30 PM to 3.00 AM next morning and it is only after the manager gave it in writing under threat as assurance that 20 bonus would be paid, the gherao was lifted. Management also stated that these workman caused damage to the property of the estate.
6. Workmen in their written statement contended that on the night of 12.10.1980 the Manager of the Estate by name Shri D.K. Ghosh and one Shri Ratan Babu met some of the workers including one Benja Lohar being armed with guns. It is stated that the Manager on seeing the workmen got furious and hit Benja with the butt of his gun on the left side of his head and Ratan Babu hit the other workmen by name Suko on her right hand, Benja fell unconscious and on hearing the scream of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.