important point
Discretion vested in the Industrial Tribunal u/s 11-A is wide whereas the discretion in writ jurisdiction is extremely limited. However it must be exercised judicially and judiciously.

judgment

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. —

1.Appellants call in question the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court allowing the Special Civil Applications filed by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ‘employer’).

2.The respondent had filed the applications questioning correctness of the award dated 31.12.2004 passed by the Labour Court. Another set of petitions were filed by the employer questioning correctness of the said award by which the Labour Court had partially allowed the reference of the concerned workmen. By the said award the workmen were directed to be re-instated in service with continuity but without back wages. Challenge of the workmen was to the award insofar as it provided for no back wages and only re-instatement.

3.Background facts in a nutshell are as follows :

Respondent is involved in providing public utility services. In the year 1989-1990, there were certain disputes between the management and the employees. There was an extended strike in which a large number of employees employed by the respondent-company participated. This disrupted the working of the plant where the concerned workmen were employed. The respondent-company, therefore, initiated disciplinary action against the striking employees. Against the workmen concerned, charge sheet came to be issued. Since the workmen did not participate they were proceeded ex-parte. Eventually, eight workmen were dismissed from the service by the respondent-company by order dated 01.03.1990. The concerned workmen, therefore, raised industrial disputes challenging their dismissal orders.

Earlier once the references were disposed of by the Labour Court by an award dated 23.04.1999. The workmen concerned were directed to be reinstated in service with full back-wages from the date of dismissal till reinstatement. The employer challenged the award of the Labour Court by filing Special Civil Application No.6055/1999. The learned Single Judge disposed of the application on 14.5.2004 by giving certain directions, and the proceedings were remanded back to the Labour Court. These directions read as follows :

“11. For the reason stated above, it is necessary to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and awards while giving the following directions :-

I.The proceedings of aforesaid Reference Cases are remanded back to the Labour Court for re-trial.

II.When the proceedings of the aforesaid cases are remanded back to the Labour Court, the petitioner will be at liberty to lead additional evidence to substantiate its action taken against the respondents.

III.The respondents will be at liberty to lead evidence contra.

IV.The material already adduced before the Labour Court including the oral evidence led on behalf of the respondents will remain as it is.

V.The Labour Court to complete the hearing and final declaration of the judgment and awards on or before 30th September, 2004.

VI.That parties to the aforesaid Reference cases will fully cooperate the Labour Court with the hearing of the cases and no adjournment will be sought without compelling reasons. The common judgment and award passed in Reference L.C.A. Nos. 139/1998, 146/1998, 162/1998, 145/1998 and 150/1998 dated 23rd April, 1999 are hereby ordered to be quashed and set aside. The petitions are allowed. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs”.

4.After remand, the Labour Court took up the proceedings afresh, recorded the evidence and passed the awards on 31.12.2004.

5.Before recording the observations and conclusions of the Labour Court in the impugned award, it would be useful to notice the allegations made against the concerned workmen by the employer.

6.Charges against all the workmen were identical. Twelve different charges were leveled against them. By way of illustration the High Court took the case of appellant No.1. The charges read as follows:

“(1)Use of impertinent languages, insult to superiors, indecent behaviour, insubordination and any act which is subversive of discipline.

(2)U