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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Securitrans India (P.) Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Manoj Prasad - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14889 of 2021 & CM Appls. 47058-59 of 2021 with W.P.(C) 14901 of 2021 & CM Appls. 47079-80 of 2021 and W.P.(C) 14902 of 2021 & CM Appls. 47081-82 of 2021 with W.P.(C) 14903 of 2021 & CM Appls. 47083-84 of 2021 with W.P.(C) 14904 of 2021 & CM Appls
Decided On : 23-12-2021




The Labour Court must decide the validity of a domestic inquiry as a preliminary issue in employment termination cases to ensure adherence to natural justice principles.

Headnote:(A) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 2(s) - Labour Court - Preliminary Issue - The Court emphasizes the necessity for the Labour Court to first assess the validity of a domestic inquiry as a preliminary issue before addressing the termination of employment, reaffirming settled legal precedents that prioritize adherence to principles of natural justice. (Paras 7, 12).

(B) Principles of Natural Justice - The Court reiterates that any alleged bias or unfairness in inquiry proceedings must be adjudicated prior to examining the merits of termination. (Paras 4, 12).

Facts of the case:
The Management (Employer) sought to challenge the Labour Court's orders regarding the termination of Workmen after an internal inquiry, noting the need for the inquiry's legality to be resolved as a preliminary issue.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed the Labour Court to prioritize resolving the inquiry's validity before further proceedings, reinforcing the management's opportunity to present evidence if necessary.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the domestic inquiry's validity warranted separate preliminary adjudication before finalizing the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that a determination of the inquiry's legality was essential to uphold natural justice, emphasizing proper procedural sequence in adjudication of termination cases (Paras 11, 12).

Result: Writ petitions allowed, directing a preliminary issue resolution.

Table of Content
1. challenge to termination of workmen after inquiry (Para 2 , 3)
2. management's concern about preliminary issue framing (Para 4 , 5)
3. importance of deciding validity of domestic inquiry first (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. agreement on framing validity of inquiry as preliminary issue (Para 10 , 11)
5. direction for labour court to adjudicate preliminary issue (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done in physical Court. Hybrid mode is permitted in cases where permission is being sought from the Court.

2. These are six petitions filed by the Petitioner-Management (hereinafter "Management") challenging the order dated 22nd November, 2021 passed by the Labour Court in LIR No.2920/19, 2921/19, 2922/19, 2023/19, 2925/19 & 2926/19 whereby an application which was filed by the Management for framing of an additional issue in the proceedings before the Labour Court, and for deciding the said issue as a preliminary issue was partly allowed.

3. In this matter, the Respondents-Workmen (hereinafter "Workmen"), who were working with the Petitioner at various ATMs, were terminated after a disciplinary inquiry was held by the Petitioner. The said termination was challenged by the Workmen before the Labour Court. In the said claims filed by the Workmen, the terms of reference were framed on 3rd October, 2019. The matter was thereafter proceeded before the Labour Court. On 1st October, 2021, the following issues were framed:

    "(1) Whether the workman is not covered under definition of a "workman" as defined under Section 2 (s) of I.D. Act? OPM.

    (2) Whether the services of workman have been illegally and unjustifiably terminated by the management? OPW.

    (3) If the answer to the aforesaid issue is in affirmative, then as to what monetary or any other consequential relief and benefits, the workman is entitled? OPW.

    (4) In terms of reference.

    (5) Relief."

4. Since the Workmen had been terminated after a proper internal inquiry which was held by the Management, an application was moved by the Management seeking framing of a preliminary issue in respect of the validity and legality of the inquiry. The case of the Management was that as per the settled legal position, the Labour Court ought to frame an issue in respect of the said inquiry and thereafter treat the same as a preliminary issue. The Management relied upon various decisions of the Supreme Court in this regard. In the said application, the following order was passed by the Labour Court:

    "An application has been filed by the management to frame preliminary issue with respect to validity of inquiry. Reply of the application is filed by the workman denying the contentions and praying to dismiss the application.

    Arguments heard on the application and gone through the judgment relied by the management in support of contentions. The issues in this case were framed on 01.10.2021. Though the issue raised regarding the inquiry is well covered under the issue no. 2 regarding illegal termination of the workman by the management but in view of the specific objections of the management in the written statement, an additional issue vide issue no. 1 A is framed as under: -

    Issue No. 1A:

    Whether the inquiry conducted against the workman by the management was biased, unfair and not in consonance with the principles of natural justice? OPW

    As regards, the prayer to frame the issue of inquiry as preliminary issue, the request is disallowed as the issue pertains to issue of law and facts.

    Application is disposed off accordingly.

    Affidavit of the workman by way of evidence filed. Copy supplied to the AR for the management.

    Put up for examination and cross-examination of the workman on 20.01.2022."

5. Mr. Arun Mehta, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Management, submits that the grievance of the Management is that if the inquiry related issue now framed as issue no.1A, is not decided as a preliminary issue and if the matter is adjudicated upon toget

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 Back to top