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

2018 Supreme(Del) 3248

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. Muralidhar, Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
Poonnamma Vishwanathan - Appellant
Vs.
Moolchand Khairati Ram Hospital And Ayurvedic Research Institute - Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal No. 264 of 2016
Decided On : 21-12-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Jose P. Verghese, Adv., K. Gireesh Kumar, Adv., M.Y. Khan, Adv.

Headnote:

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 33(2)(b) – Industrial dispute – Termination – Charge of misconduct – Scope of – Scope of challenge before the learned Single Judge – Industrial Tribunal has held that there is no prima facie evidence against the Appellant to establish the charge of misconduct – Workmen along with co-workmen were advised not to indulge in illegal and unjustified acts at the main gate of the hospital – No witnesses to prove she was sitting in Dharnapradarshan – Single Judge has erred in allowing the writ petition of the Management – Appellant has superannuated – Impugned judgment set aside – Management shall grant all consequential benefits – Appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Narula, J.

The present appeal under clause X of the Letters Patents Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21st December 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge deciding- W.P.(C) 13752/2009 filed by the employee Poonnamma Vishwanathan (Appellant herein) and W.P.(C) 2957/2010 filed by the Management- Respondent.

2. By way of the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has interalia remanded Management's application under Section 33(2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'ID Act'), bearing OP No. 71/2005 (seeking approval for dismissal of the Appellant) to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh adjudication.

Scope of challenge before the learned Single Judge

3. In W.P.(C) 13752/2009, Appellant herein sought implementation of the orders dated 10th January 2005, 31st March 2006 and 8th May 2006 passed by the Industrial Tribunal. On the other hand in W.P.(C) 2957/2010, the Management challenged the validity of the aforesaid orders.

Factual Background

4. The Appellant was working as Auxiliary Nurse with Moolchand Kharati Ram Hospital and Ayruvedic Medical Research Institute (Respondent) w.e.f. 16th February 1987. According to the Respondent, Appellant indulged in several acts of misconduct. A charge sheet dated 20th August 2001 was served upon the Appellant containing the following charges:

"Ms Ponamma Vishwanathan

A.N.M.

Nursing Department,

MCKR Hospital,

New Delhi- 110024

Sub: CHARGESHEET

You are working in the Hospital as A.N.M.

It has been reported that you along with Ms MaryKutty Thomas and Ms LaxmiKutty M.N. instigated Dharna and participated in the same near the main gate of the Hospital from 01.05.2000 with the support of some dismissed and suspended employees as well as outsiders. There was also a rely hunger strike along with the dharna. The Dharna and the relay hunger strike used to be round the clock and continuous. You along with Ms Marykutty Thomas and Ms Laxmikutty M.N. went around the hospital and asked the workers, nurses and other employees to join the Dharna and also participated in the relay hunger strike.

Occasionally, the Dharna became violent and could have led to immense danger to life and property. Due to Dharna, there was serious problem to patients, their visitors, doctors and other para medical staff and employees. You alongwith Ms Marykutty Thomas and Ms Laxmikutty M.N. were advised by your superior Dy. Nursing Superintendent Ms Sumathy Pillai not to indulge in such illegal and unjustified acts and such activities are never expected specially from the nursing staff. Their advice was of no use and you kept on instigating and participating in Dharna form time to time. The Dharna at the main gate had serious implications on the functioning and reputation of the hospital by lowering the image of the Hospital in the eyes of the visitors. The above is a serious misconduct on your part.

Considering the report of DNS, Ms Sumathy Pillai, a meeting was organized by Shri Shravan Talwar, Hony Secretary at about 12 noon on 12.05.2000 in which you alongwith Ms Marykutty Thomas and Ms Laxmikutty M.N. as well as Ms Sumathy Pillai, DNS and other executives of the hospital Mr S K Saggar, General Manager(F&A) and Mr Dinesh Kumar, Office Supdt. were also called. When the meeting was in progress, you alongwith Ms Marykutty Thomas and Ms. Laxmikutty M.N. in collusion with each other as well as in collusion with Shri. Vijender Singh, a dismissed employee of the hospital, who has also been claiming himself to be the General Secretary of an alleged union namely MCKRH Karamchari union made a false complaint on telephone to Police Control (PCR) on telephone No. 100. Due to coming of the police in the Hospital, there was total disturbance and commotion. The work was also seriously disturbed for over an hour. The police investigated and made enquiries and found that this was a false and baseless complaint. This act of your in connivance with others of making a false complaint against the seni

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top