The central legal point established in the judgment is the liberal interpretation of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, emphasizing the power of the Tribunal to set aside the order of discharge or dismissal and the need to further the policy and object of the Act to improve and safeguard the service conditions of an employee.

JUDGMENT

Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J. - This writ application has been filed by the employer company for setting aside/quashing the final award dated 19.02.2020 passed by the Learned First Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal in Case No. VIII-02/2011. In this case the respondent No. 3/employee (the employee hereinafter) was dismissed from service by the writ petitioner (the employer hereinafter) with effect from 11th November, 2009. This dismissal was a result of a domestic enquiry held by the employer. Tribunal has set aside the order of dismissal.

2. The employee raised a dispute in respect of such dismissal and the Government of West Bengal referred the matter for adjudication and for submitting the award to the State Government. The reference is of 04.01.2011.

3. The dispute is pending for last nearly 12 years.

4. The employee challenged the validity of the domestic enquiry before the Tribunal contending, he was working in the establishment for 19 (nineteen) years honestly, faithfully and with full satisfaction of the employer, but the employer by issuing a charge-sheet dated 02.08.2008 alleged that on 31.07.2008 while on duty he was caught red handed by the Supervisor, when he was throwing 08 (eight) Nos. Butt Cakes of 102 Bright Denier in a cartoon which was misconduct as he threw away valuable goods as waste. The allegation against him was that it was against working norms and system of the department and the employee had deceptive motive in doing so.

The following three charges were brought against the employee on the basis of certified standing orders of the company which are as follows:

(i) Dishonesty

(ii) Wilful damage to or loss of company's good

(iii) Act subversive of discipline.

The Tribunal after adjudication held that charge of dishonesty was not proved and the two other charges of wilful damage or loss to company's goods and act subversive of discipline were proved in the domestic enquiry. Whether the punishment was justified was a question required to be decided.

5. Before the Tribunal evidences were adduced by the parties and documents were marked as exhibits and there is no allegation of the employer that the Tribunal adjudicated the matter by violating well established legal principles or violating the principles of natural justice or ignoring the law of the land.

The allegation of the employer is that the Tribunal has passed an order which is contradictory as on one hand it has been held that out of three charges two have been proved and on the other hand it has been held that the termination of the employee was illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.

The real question involved in this matter is whether the decision of the tribunal is contradictory or not. As the employee during the course of the proceeding reached age of superannuation he could not be reinstated and therefore, the Tribunal directed the employer to pay the full back wages from the date of termination i.e. from 11.11.2009 till the date of the superannuation.

6. The case of the employer wholly revolves on the contention that when the result of a departmental enquiry has been upheld in respect of two charges by the Tribunal itself, the Tribunal does not have the power to grant full relief to the employee. The contentions of the employer have been framed as grounds of the writ application. Those grounds are as follows and apart from these grounds/contentions no other ground/contention has been raised by the employer during hearing of the matter.

"III. For that it is a trite law that once validity of domestic enquiry is established, the only question open to adjudication before a Learned Tribunal is that of "quantum of punishment". In the case at hand despite holding the domestic enquiry to be valid and legal, the Learned Tribunal, vide the impugned award dated 19.02.2020, quashed the order of punishment thereby completely exonerating the respondent workman from the charges proved against him in a valid domestic enquiry.

IV. For that the Learned Tribunal