A fair inquiry process must adhere to principles of natural justice, and physical assault on a superior mandates strict disciplinary action without leniency.

JUDGMENT

Gaurang Kanth, J. Both these writ petitions are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. These writ petitions arise out of the Awards dated 12.10.2001 and 20.05.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.

2. W.P.(C) 5431/2003 is preferred by Petitioner/Sh. Harish Chander for setting aside the Award dated 20.05.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the learned Presiding Officer granted reinstatement to the petitioner with 50% backwages. Sh. Harish Chander (herein after referred to as `the delinquent') has filed the present writ petition for granting full backwages with continuity in service. W.P.(C) 5892/2003 is preferred by the Petitioner/D.T.C. for setting aside the Awards dated 12.10.2001 and 20.05.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby Sh. Harish Chander was granted reinstatement in service with 50% backwages.

FACTS OF THE CASE

3. The facts borne out of the records leading to the present petition are that the Petitioner was brought on monthly rates of pay with effect from 23.05.1977. On 21.10.1983, petitioner along with his two other associates entered the office of Mr. K. K. Berry, Depot Manager, DTC and during the discussion, the petitioner used abusive language and assaulted the Depot Manager. Mr. K. K. Berry, Depot Manager submitted a report dated 10.10.1983 to the Assistant General Manager (Traffic). Pursuant to the report of Sh. K. K. Berry under order of Assistant General Manager, the delinquent was placed under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings. On 21.10.1983, the delinquent was served with a charge-sheet. The delinquent filed a reply against the allegations levelled against him in the Charge-sheet. However, the competent authority was not satisfied with their reply and a regular enquiry was initiated against the delinquent. The enquiry officer submitted his report dated 10.11.1987 wherein the delinquent was found to be guilty of all the charges levelled against him. On 15.12.1987, the Disciplinary Authority agreed with the finding of the Enquiry Officer and issued a show cause notice with proposal of removal from services. On 15.01.1988, the delinquent was removed from his services w.e.f. 16.01.1988. Against the termination order, the delinquent raised an Industrial Dispute which was referred to the learned Labour Court, Delhi for adjudication. The learned Labour Court vide its Award dated 12.10.2001 decided the preliminary issue of validity of enquiry in favour of the delinquent. Thereafter, the learned Labour Court passed an Award dated 20.05.2002 directing reinstatement of the delinquent with 50% backwages. Against the impugned Awards dated 12.10.2001 and 20.05.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi the present writ petitions have been filed.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF DTC

4. Mr. Uday N. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of DTC contended that the Awards dated 12.10.2001 and 20.05.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IV, Karkardooma Courts are liable to be set aside as they are based on conjecture and surmises ignoring the material evidence on record. Learned counsel further contended that the learned Labour Court erred in passing the impugned Awards dated 12.10.2001 and 20.05.2002 against the delinquent as the learned Labour Court has failed to take into consideration the testimony of Mr. K. K. Berry, who was duly cross-examined by the delinquent and proves