SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Pat) 263

SATYESHWAR ROY
Tata Engineering And Locomotive Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal – Respondent


Judgment

Satyeshwar Roy, J.

1. The petitioner-Company has challenged the validity of the order dated 3rd December, 1983 as contained in Annexure-11 in Reference Case No. 20 of 1981 by which respondent No. 1 held that the departmental proceeding initiated against the workman-respondent No. 2 was not fair and proper and Annexure-12, the award dated 28th January 1984 by which respondent No. 1 held that the order of discharge passed against respondent No. 2 was not justified and directed for his reinstatement. In the award, a direction was also given for payment of all back wages to him.

2. The workman at the relevant time was working as a Press Operator under the petitioner. He absented himself without any leave or permission with effect from 19th December, 1970. According to the petitioner, in view of his continued unauthorised absence, on 8th January, 1971 a charge sheet against the workman was drawn up and it was sent to his address at Jamshedpur as also his home address. The workman did not file any show cause and the departmental proceeding proceeded ex parte. The workman was found guilty of absence without permission or leave. By order dated 5th March, 1971 he was discharged.

3.























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top