High Court of Kerala
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. BALAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. RAVINDRAN
B. Rajagopal
Versus
Jolly Xavier & Another
WA.Nos. 215 of 2009 & 250 of 2009
Decided on : 03-03-2010
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2A & 11A - Writ Appeals are filed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P - Management and the workman challenged the award of the Industrial Tribunal,in I.D. by filing the above Writ Petitions -Single Judge, by the aforementioned common judgment, allowed the Writ Petition filed by the management and dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the workman - Held, Court is in entire agreement with the aforesaid view and Court share the anxiety of my Lord Brother Justice Singhvi about a disturbing contrary trend which is discernible in recent times and which is sought to be justified in the name of globalisation and liberalisation of economy - Court is of the view that any attempt to dilute the constitutional imperatives in order to promote the so called trends of "Globalization", may result in precarious consequences - Court is not venturing to do that, as we are bound by the principles laid down therein - Principle laid down in those decisions is that the Tribunal could interfere with the punishment, if only it is shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence - Court is of the opinion that the plausible view taken by the Tribunal that the punishment is grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence, cannot be unsettled, invoking the power of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as this Court is not constituted as an Appellate Court under that Article - Order Accordingly.
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
1. These Writ Appeals are filed against the common judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos.5522 and 21226 of 2004. The management and the workman challenged the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki, in I.D.No.42/01, by filing the above Writ Petitions. The learned Single Judge, by the aforementioned common judgment, allowed the Writ Petition filed by the management and dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the workman. Hence, these two Writ Appeals by the workman, challenging the said common judgment.
2. The brief facts of the case are the following : Unless otherwise specifically mentioned, the parties and exhibits are mentioned as referred to in W.P.(C)5522/04, from which W.A.215/09 arises. The appellant was a workman of a coffee estate in Nelliampathy, owned by a partnership firm, viz., Walliawarum Plantations. The first respondent herein is its Managing Partner. It appears, the appellant was apprehending disciplinary action against him. In that context, it is alleged that he threatened the father of the Managing Partner, of dire consequences to his son, if any action is taken against him. It is also alleged that he, along with his brother threatened one of the partners of the firm, by blocking his car and entering into it. For the above mentioned alleged misconducts, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the appellant, by issuing a charge memo dated 4.9.1997. A translation of the said charge memo reads as follows :-
"Your reply dated 10.9.1997 to the notice dated 4.9.1997 issued to you, has been received. Various assertions in your aforesaid reply having no nexus with the charges leveled against you as per notice dated 4.9.1997, are not being dealt with now. However, your explanations to the charges leveled against you are not satisfactory. Therefore, you are issued a charge sheet as hereunder.
"Due to enmity of majority of workmen employed in the coffee and cardamom estate of Walliawaram Plantations situated at Nelliampathy; you while residing in your house at Arumannoor with the knowledge of the management since 24.7.1997, along with your brother, B.Anilkumar acting on your instigation had on several occasions in the month of August 1997 threatened and caused mental pain by stating "Your son will be killed" to Mr.K.M.Xavier residing at Kadakkassery House, Kanjikuzhi, at his house, who is the father of the partners and who is leading a retired life due to sickness and old age. Further, you had on several occasions threatened him over phone stating "I am going to the estate, and if anybody dares to touch me, I will kill your son."
Further, on 1.9.1997 at about 3 p.m., when Shri.Johny Joseph who is one of the owners of the estate was on his way to his house at Ayyarkunnam, you along with your brother, B.Anilkumar obstructed the car while in front of Ayyarkunnam High School, having followed and overtaken it. After obstructing the car when you shouted "Can't you issue notice terminating my services, you rascal?" and when Mr.Johny replied asking you to pose it to the person authorized for it at Kottayam and not to him, you again shouted "That useless is of no use." You forcefully got into the car stating that he should not be allowed to leave. When the car started slowly moving forward, you tried to stop the car by pushing the gear lever, tried to take off the switch key, caught hold of his hand and switched off the car by forcibly pressing the clutch. When you threatened to stab him with knife, people around gathered hearing the commotion and thereupon you alighted from the car and went off with your brother by scooter."
To conduct an enquiry into the matter, Shri.Santosh Modayil, Advocate, Kottayam-2 is appointed as the Enquiry Officer. The venue, date, time, etc. will be informed to you by him and you are required to participate in the enquiry conducted by him. In the enquiry you will be given all opportunity to cross-examine evidence against you and to adduce ev
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.