Back
Karnataka High Court
Judges : M.Rama Jois
BHARATH ELECTRONICS LTD. - Appellant
Versus
K.KASI - Respondent
W. P. 8738 Of 1984
Decided On : 01/17/1986
Industrial Disputes Act - Validity of Domestic Inquiry - Section 33 (2) (b)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, M/s. Bharat Electronics, challenged the legality of the order made by the Industrial Tribunal Bangalore, rejecting its application under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 seeking approval for the dismissal of the first respondent. The first respondent was dismissed for grave misconduct after assaulting a superior officer on the factory premises.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointment of the Inquiry Officer and the absence of a Presenting Officer did not invalidate the domestic inquiry. The court also held that the Inquiry Officer did not exhibit bias and the charge sheet was adequately explained to the first respondent. The court set aside the Industrial Tribunal's order and remitted the matter for reconsideration on the role of the Inquiry Officer as a Presenting Officer.
Issues: Validity of the domestic inquiry, appointment of the Inquiry Officer, absence of a Presenting Officer, bias of the Inquiry Officer, and explanation of the charge sheet to the first respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: The absence of a statutory provision for disciplinary proceedings makes it a managerial function. The court emphasized that the appointment of the Inquiry Officer by the Competent Authority and the absence of a Presenting Officer did not invalidate the inquiry. The court also highlighted the need for specific evidence of bias and the adequate explanation of the charge sheet to the employee.
Final Decision: The court set aside the Industrial Tribunal's order and remitted the matter for reconsideration on the role of the Inquiry Officer as a Presenting Officer.
( 2 ) THE facts of the case, in brief, are as follows : The first respondent was an employee in the service of the petitioner. Disciplinary proceedings were instituted against him by the issue of charge sheet dated 18th October, 1979 (Annexure-A ). It reads : "confidential bharat Electronics Limited Jalahalli P. O. , Bangalore-13. No. 031242/div-I/pd Date : 18th october, 1979. CHARGE-SHEET
( 3 ) FOR reasons stated infra, Sri K. Kasi, Staff No. 031242, is called upon to furnish his explanation within four days of receipt of this communication as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. REASONS : on 18th October, 1979 at about 8. 45 a. m. in the Electroplating shop of LPE Division he approached Sri K. M. Srinivasan, Deputy Manager, Finishing/lpe with a shop order and asked him in a defiant manner for some clarification. When the Deputy Manager asked him to approach the Foreman and stated that, if necessary, he will himself look into the matter, he (Shri kasi) angrily spat on his face and assaulted him by hitting him on the neck and showered derogatory abuses in plenty.
( 4 ) HIS above mentioned acts during working hours in the factory premises constitute grave mis-conduct under Company's Standing Orders 15 (1) (h) and 15 (1) (v ).
( 5 ) PENDING submission of explanation and enquiry into the matter, he is placed under suspension without wages with immediate effect.
( 6 ) IF no explanation is received within the stipulated time, it will be presumed that he has no explanation to offer but admits the charges levelled against him and further action will be taken on that basis. Sd/- B. N. Seshadri, 18 October, 1979 Deputy General Manager (LPE ). " the petitioner submitted his reply denying the charges. Thereafter, one K. G. Thimmappa was appointed as the Inquiring Authority. He held the inquiry. He recorded a finding to the effect that the first respondent was guilty of the charges. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority accepted the inquiry Report and issued a show cause notice to the first respondent. After considering the reply furnished by the first respondent, final order dated 11th May, 1981, (Annexure-G) imposing the penalty of dismissal from service was passed. Relevant portion of the order reads :
"i have gone through carefully the enquiry proceedings and the findings of the Enquiry Officer in the case of Sri K. Kasi, Staff No. 031242, HSM-1, Electroplating Fabrication LPE. I concur with the findings of the Enquiry Officer who has found Sri Kasi guilty of the charges of approaching Sri K. M. Srinivasan, Deputy Manager, Finishing LPE in a defiant manner, spitting on his face and assaulting him. I have also considered carefully the explanation dated 11th March, 1981 offered by Sri Kasi in reply the show cause notice served on him. I have not found any case that may deserve reviewal of the punishment already proposed. An act of assaulting a superior officer right on the shop floor constitutes a serious misconduct and such an act tends to undermine the discipline on the shop floor, as well as smooth functioning of the factory. The charges proved against Sri Kasi at the enquiry being grave and serious, I am not inclined to view the case leniently. I have gone through his past records of service. I have not found any extenuating circumstances which may go to mitigate the seriousness of the charges. I therefore hereby pass orders that Sri Kasi be dismissed from the service of the Company and necessary legal formalities complied with. "
As certain industrial disputes between the petitioner and the workmen of the petitioner were pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore,
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
