2009 Supreme(SC) 1315

2009(6) Supreme 85
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Tarun Chatterjee and Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ.
Biecco Lawrie Ltd. & Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of West Bengal & Anr. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 245 of 2007
Decided on : 28-07-2009

IMPORTANT POINT
Principle of natural justice is attracted where there is some right which is likely to be affected by any act of the administration including a legitimate expectation.

Headnote:Industrial Disputes Act – Section 7A – Dismissal of services of respondent appointed as general mazdoor in the Switch Gear works of appellants on ground of misconduct by Tribunal – Writ Petition – Allowed by High Court remitting matter back to Tribunal for reconsideration – Tribunal held that respondent was illegally terminated by the appellants and dismissal order was not justified and hence liable to be set aside – Writ Petition – Dismissed by Single Judge-Appeal-Dismissed by Division Bench – Appeal – Instantly materials on record showed that respondent had been furnished with proper notices intimating him the date, time and place of hearing well before time and the respondent had also received notices as was indicated from the postal acknowledge-ments made by him in his own letters addressed to the management – On a perusal of the charge sheet it was evident that the charges laid down were precise and specific in nature along with the relevant provision of the standing order and neatly laid down the consequences thereof – Nothing in charge sheet to show that there was any patent or latent vagueness involved and they were unintelligible – Respondent was fully aware of the charges and even their specifications and also the probable witnesses for his misconduct - Respondent had been provided with various chances to present his case before the Enquiry Officer and also present evidence that he could do to justify his defence – Punishment was not harsh in comparison to the charges leveled against the respondent – Single Judge misused the power vested in him by remanding back the matter to the industrial tribunal for reconsideration when the charges were found to be proved – The tribunal also erred in reversing its own decision on the same evidence – Impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court as well as of Single Judge held liable to be set aside – Order of dismissal passed against the respondent restored – Appeal allowed. (Paras 13, 14, 23 to 26)

        Principle of natural justice – Principle of natural justice is attracted whenever a person suffers a civil consequence or a prejudice is caused to him by an administrative action – Principle of natural justice is attracted where there is some right which is likely to be affected by any act of the administration including a legitimate expectation – The procedure to be followed is not a matter of secondary importance and in the broadest sense natural justice simply indicates the sense of what is right and wrong – As a well-defined concept, it comprises of two fundamental rules of fair procedure that- a man may not be a judge in his own cause (nemo judex in re sua) and that a man’s defence must always be fairly heard. (Para 12)

       Facts of the Case :

        Respondent appointed as general mazdoor in the Switch Gear works of appellants was dismissed from services herein in the instant case on ground of misconduct by Tribunal. Writ Petition thereagainst was allowed by High Court remitting matter back to Tribunal for reconsideration. Tribunal held that respondent was illegally terminated by the appellants and dismissal order was not justified and hence was liable to be set aside.Writ Petition thereaganst was dismissed by Single Judge. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by Division Bench.

        2. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

        Instantly materials on record showed that respondent had been furnished with proper notices intimating him the date, time and place of hearing well before time and the respondent had also received notices as was indicated from the postal acknowledgements made by him in his own letters addressed to the management. On a perusal of the charge sheet it was evident that the charges laid down were precise and specific in nature along with the relevant provision of the standing order and neatly laid down the consequences thereof. Nothing in charge sheet to show that there was any patent or latent vagueness involved and they were unintelligible. Respondent was fully aware of the charges and even their specifications and also the probable witnesses for his misconduct . Respondent had been provided with various chances to present his case before the Enquiry Officer and also present evidence that he could do to justify his defence.. Single Judge misused the power vested in him by remanding back the matter to the industrial tribunal for reconsideration when the charges were found to be proved. The tribunal also erred in reversing its own decision on the same evidence. Impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court as well as of Single Judge was held liable to be set aside . Order of dismissal passed against the respondent was restored. Appeal was allowed.

       Result : Appeal allowed.