Under Section 11A, labour courts can deem discharge disproportionate and order reinstatement with partial back wages for misconduct amid mitigating medical negligence, even post-fair inquiry.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant Writ Application has been preferred by the Petitioner praying therein for quashing of the Award dated 15.1.2008 passed in Reference Case No.14 of 1988 by the Learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Jamshedpur; whereby the Ld. Labour Court has quashed the order of discharge of the respondent workman from his service and has further directed the reinstatement of the respondent along with 40% back wages and other consequential benefits and has further ordered that the respondent shall be deemed to be in continuous service.

3. Briefly stated, the original respondent-workman namely C.K. Singh, who died during pendency of this case, was working since 14.07.1969 as unskilled MATE up to October, 1972 and thereafter, he was made permanent and was given designation of Motor Mechanic in the Auto Transport Department in Petitioner Company. On 08.02.1983, the workman had undergone a surgery at TELCO Hospital by one Dr. N.G. Das, Senior Surgeon, in his scrotum. Stitches were cut on 15.02.1983 but one stitch was left by the said Doctor i.e. Dr. N.G.Das and as a result of negligence on the part of the doctor, there was severe pain in the operated portion (scrotum), and it became septic. Accordingly, on 22.02.1983, the workman went to the said Hospital and met the said Dr. N.G.Das who operated on him and complained about the pain in his scrotum and both the legs and requested to get him admitted. On examination, it was found that one stitch was not removed. However, the said Doctor refused to admit him and simply asked him to get one injection and come another day. As the workman was in severe pain, he started yelling on the said Doctor for getting him admitted.

The further the case of the workman is that after few days he again approached the Doctor and stitches were removed.

4. After two days of the said incident, the aforesaid Doctor namely, N.G. Das, Senior Surgeon, made a formal complaint to the Management of the Petitioner Company and requested to take necessary action against the workman for using filthy languages and extending threat against him.

Based on the above complaint, the workman was charge sheeted on 16.03.1983 for his alleged misconduct under sub-clauses 24(xvi)………….fighting or riotous or disorderly or indecent behavior or any act subversive of discipline or efficiency and (xxxii) threatening or intimidating any employee within the work premises.

5. A departmental inquiry was instituted and on the basis of the evidence recorded by the Inquiry Officer, the workman was found guilty of the alleged misconduct and recommended for his discharge.

The Disciplinary Authority being satisfied with the Inquiry Officer’s report discharged the workman from service w.e.f. 18.06.1984.

6. Consequently, an Industrial Dispute was raised by the Engineering Mazdoor Panchayat, Jamshedpur (to be referred as Sponsoring Union) and upon failure of conciliation, the appropriate government u/s 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Dispute Act referred the matter for adjudication to the Labour Court, giving rise to reference case no. 14 of 1988. The terms of reference reads as under:-

“Whether the termination of service of Shri C.K. Singh, ticket no. 9909/73123, workman of TELCO is proper and justified? If not, what relief he is entitled to.”

7. The said reference ca