Judgement

VAIDIALINGAM, J.:- This appeal, by special leave, is against the orders dated September 27, 1966 of the Industrial Court Madhya Pradesh, Indore, in Revisions Nos. 46 and 50/MPIR/66 reversing the order Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ujjain, in case No. 17 of 1969 Labour.

2. The appellant, at the material time, was an employee of the respondent Company and was working in its coal and Bardana section as Coal Ash Supervisor. He was on duty on the morning of April 24, 1963. It was the duty of the appellant to sign and issue slips to the contractors in order to enable the latter to remove coal ash on donkeys outside the premises of the Company. As, according to the Company, some malpractice was suspected on the part of the appellant in the issue of such slips, the latter was suspended and a charge sheet dated April 26, 1963, issued. In the charge-sheet it was stated that the appellant had issued gate pass to one Bhagirath on April, 24, 1963 in order to enable the latter to remove 48 donkey loads of coal ash. It was alleged that the appellant gave eight more slips to Bhagirath on April 25, 1963 to enable the latter to remove additional material from the Company s premises. On checking at the gate, it was discovered that Bhagirath was removing extra goods which he was not entitled to do. On these allegations, the appellant was charged under Standing Order No. 12 for dishonesty in connection with the business of the Company s property. He was asked to show cause why he should not be dismissed for the said misconduct.

3. The appellant sent on April 29, 1963 a fairly elaborate answer to the show cause notice. He controverted the allegations that he had acted dishonestly in dealing with the Company s property. On the other hand, he pleaded that there was an enormous rush of work on the relevant date and that by mistake or inadvertence he may have issued additional slips to the contractor Bhagirath He further pleaded for withdrawal of the show cause notice and for dropping the further proceedings contemplated in the notice.

4. An enquiry was held in respect of the allegations made against the appellant. As a result of the inquiry, the appellant was discharged from service with effect from May 15, 1963. After setting out the allegations against the appellant, the explanation furnished by him as also the substance of the notice recorded in the enquiry, the order proceeds to state that the plea of the appellant to state that the plea of the appellant that he committed a mistake in issuing additional slips on account of rush of work has not been established and that, on the other-hand, it is proved that he deliberately issued the additional slips, with a view to enable Bhagirath to remove extra quantity of coal ash which he was not entitled to do under the contract. It is further stated that it is not in the interest of the Company to retain the appellant in its service any longer and as such he was discharged from service with effect from May 15, 1963 on being paid one month s salary in lieu of notice.

5. The appellant sent a letter dated July 26, 1963 to the Company as required by the proviso to S. 31 (3) of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (Act No. 27 of 1960) (hereinafter to be referred as the Act). This notice is called an Approach Notice and by the that notice the appellant requested the company to reconsider its previous decision dated May 3, 1963 and reinstate him in service. The Company sent a reply declining to reconsider its previous decision and informed the workman that he cannot be taken back into service.

6. The appellant filed an application before the Pesiding Officer, Labour Court, Ujjain under S. 31 (3) of the Act, praying for setting aside the order dated May 3, 1963 passed by the Company discharging him from service. The said application was registered as Case No. 17 of 1963 Labour. In his application the appellant challenged the order of the management on carious grounds. He averred that the inquiry