IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that an employee's admission of misconduct during an enquiry, coupled with a history of repeated violations, justifies termination, provided that the enquiry adheres to principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard Mr. Sankpal and Ms. Chavan, learned Advocates for Petitioner and Mr. Bapat, learned Senior Advocate for Respondent.

2. This Writ Petition is filed under the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 1/9/2015 passed under Exhibits "U-30" and "U-31" and Awards dtd. 23/11/2017 and 28/11/2018 passed in Reference (IDA) No. 44 of 2002 by the Labour Court, Nashik thereby upholding the termination of the Petitioner by the Respondent.

3. By consent of the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties, Writ Petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

4. Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the present case are outlined hereinunder:-

4.1. In the year 1990, Petitioner joined Respondent - Company as an Operator.

4.2. On 9/7/1998, Petitioner was issued first charge-sheet for unauthorised absenteeism of 16 days in the year 1997 - 1998. On 31/5/1999, Petitioner was issued second charge-sheet for unauthorized absenteeism of 40 days in the year 1998. On 2/9/1999, Petitioner was issued third charge-sheet for unauthorised absenteeism of 66 days in the year 1999. On 9/5/2000, Petitioner was issued fourth charge-sheet for unauthorised absenteeism of 119 days in the year 1999-2000.

4.3. In the interregnum during the year 1996-2001, Petitioner was warned by Respondent - Company on various occasions for habitual late attendance and loitering in the Respondent - Company.

4.4. On 17/5/2000, enquiry was conducted by Enquiry Officer on the basis of above 4 charge-sheets submitted to him and an equal and fair opportunity was accorded to Petitioner to defend his case. However, Petitioner chose not to file written statement or reply in the enquiry proceedings and rather categorically admitted his guilt of committing misconduct as stated in the charge-sheets. It is pertinent to note here that the Enquiry Officer in clear words asked the Petitioner if he admitted the charges levelled against him owing to any pressure or inducement, to which Petitioner categorically answered in the negative and replied that he accepted all charges of misconduct levelled against him out of his own free will. Therefore, Enquiry Officer filed his report dtd. 3/2/2001 thereby returning findings that evidence on record and the charges of misconduct levelled against Petitioner were accepted by him and therefore stood proved and forwarded the same to Respondent - Company for further action.

4.5. On the basis of findings returned by the Enquiry Officer, on 3/10/2001, Respondent - Company issued show - cause notice to Petitioner and enclosed the Enquriy Report alongwith it and gave one more opportunity to Petitioner to offer his reasonable explanation. However, Petitioner once again failed to reply to said show-cause notice. Eventually on 10/10/2001, Respondent - Company issued termination letter to Petitioner and terminated his services on account of the above incidents of misconduct totalling to absenteeism of 357 days.

4.6. On 19/12/2001, Petitioner raised a demand seeking withdrawal of his termination and reinstatement with full back wages and continuity of service and sought intervention of the Labour Commissioner on the ground that he was induced to admit the charges levelled against him during the Enquiry proceedings. Since the dispute was not settled, same was referred to the learned Labour Court by Reference (IDA) No.44 of 2002.

4.7. Petitioner filed his Statement of claim at Exhibit "U-12" before the learned Labour Court praying for various reliefs i.e. reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. Petitioner's subsequent defence was that he did not get his leave sanctioned from the Respondent - Company owing to his ill-health and subsequently he sent letters attaching Doctor's medical certificate to justify his absenteeism from work at all times. Petitioner submitted on record various medical certificates issued by different Doctors to justify his absenteeism