The requirement of simultaneous acts of dismissal, payment of wages, and filing of approval application as part of the same transaction under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act should be considered in compliance with the settled position of law, and each case must be decided on its own facts.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner by challenging the illegality, validity and propriety of the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the learned Labour Court No.2, Vadodara in Approval Application No.5 of 2012 which is preferred by the present petitioner under Section 33(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking approval of dismissal of respondent workman after holding detailed departmental enquiry against him.

2.1 Brief facts of the case are as such that the petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 originally established as Gordhandas Desai Private Limited and subsequently changed name to G. D. Lab Solutions Private Limited, and now it is known as G.D. Waldner India Pvt. Ltd effective from 16th July 2021, upon received approval from the concerned authorities.

2.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the company is engaged in the work of Manufacturing of Laboratory Scientific Equipment, Laboratory Furniture and Turnkey Projects for the same. The respondent workman along with other workmen of the Company placed a charter of demand through their Trade Union for enhancement of Dearness Allowance and other allowances for the period between 2011-2014 in view of the period of earlier settlement under Section 18(1) and Section 2(P) got over on 31.03.2011. Upon failure of conciliation proceedings on demand matter, the charter of demand placed by the workmen of the Company was referred to the learned Labour Court, Vadodara for adjudication of dispute, which was numbered as Demand Reference No.31 of 2012. Pending the above reference case, having found the respondent workman indulged into gross irregularities and misconduct including illegal strike, was placed under suspension on 21.03.2012 which was followed by issuance of charge sheet on 26.03.2012. The inquiry proceedings is commenced and the workman was allowed to represent his case through his lawyer. After enquiry proceedings, the workman was found guilty of the charges levelled against him by the Inquiry Officer as reported dated 06.08.2012, hence, prior to imposition of punishment, show cause notice was issued on 09.08.2012, which was replied by the workman on 17.08.2012.

2.3 The company has considered the seriousness of the charges of the respondent workman decided to terminate the workman from service from 26.03.2012 w.e.f. the date of suspension vide letter dated 07.09.2012. While terminating respondent workman from the service, he was given the one month’s notice pay and other terminal dues towards final settlement by the petitioner.

2.4 Thereafter, the company has preferred an Approval Application under Section 33(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act and Rule 63(2) of the Industrial Disputes (Gujarat) Rules, 1966 seeking approval of the Ld. Labour Court, Vadodara, as main Demand Reference No.31 of 2012 is pending. The said application is opposed by respondent submitting his reply dated 15.10.2013. On 15.04.2014, the respondent workman has filed an application praying for rejection of Company’s Approval Application at preliminary stage. That application of workman was responded by the petitioner Company on 24.06.2014. The said application came to be disposed of on 17.07.2017 as same was not pressed by the workman. The learned Labour Court recorded examination-in-chief of Officer of Company on 26.03.2018 and cross examination was done on 27.08.2018 and thereafter, both the parties have submitted their written submissions in support of their cases. The learned Labour Court No.2, Vadodara has passed order on 30.03.2022 rejecting the Approval Application No.5 of 2012 of petitioner Company.

2.5 Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred the present petition challenging the order passed by the learned Labour Court.

3. At the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, today, the matter is heard for final disposal.

4.1 Learned advocate Mr. Hriday Buch for the petitioner - Company