ORDER :

V.M. Velumani, J.

1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records from the Labour Court relating to the impugned order dated 22.10.2018 of the Labour Court in I.D. No. 100 of 2010, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with full back wages, continuity of service with other consequential benefits.

2. The brief case of the petitioner is as follows-

2(a) The petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant in National Horticulture Research & Development Foundation (NHRDF) with effect from 23.08.1983 by the 1st respondent and was posted at Dindigul. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Technical Officer with effect from 02.11.1993. Subsequently, he was transferred to various places and lastly posted at Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh.

2(b) The 1st respondent tried to punish the petitioner in a arbitrary manner by conducting enquiries. The petitioner was having sufficient number of leave to his credit but the 1st respondent rejected the leave applications of the petitioner. The petitioner gave a complaint to The Asst. Commissioner of Labour, Dindigul. The petitioner, as a Secretary of National Horticulture Research & Development Foundation (NHRDF) Association, raised Industrial Dispute. While these proceedings were pending, the petitioner was transferred from Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh on 17.08.2009. The 1st respondent did not pay the eligible TA/DA amount to the petitioner to go to Varanasi. The petitioner did not join at the transferred place, as the request of the petitioner for payment of TA/DA amount was not complied with. The petitioner was eligible to be promoted as Deputy Director. The application of petitioner for appointment as Deputy Director of Horticulture was rejected, as the then Director Dr. R.P. Gupta wanted to appoint a person of his choice. The petitioner brought to the knowledge of higher authorities the irregularities committed by A.K. Singh in procuring and disbursing seeds to the farmers and also the irregularities when a National level seminar was conducted on 4th & 5th of May 2009.

2(c) While so, the Director of the 1st respondent issued a charge memo dated 22.09.2009 containing 10 charges. The petitioner sought for various clarifications. The Director did not furnish the clarifications and did not pay TA/DA to attend the domestic enquiry at Nasik. The enquiry officer did not conduct the enquiry in a fair and proper manner but conducted the same in violation of principles of natural justice. The enquiry officer gave a report that charges levelled against the petitioner were proved. Based on the said report, the Director of NHRDF dismissed the petitioner from service.

2(d) The petitioner raised Industrial Dispute in I.D. No. 100 of 2010 before the Labour Court, Trichirapalli. The Presiding Officer, without properly considering the contentions of the petitioner, dismissed the Industrial Dispute. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition.

3. The petitioner appeared as party-in-person and contended that-

(i) The petitioner was appointed by the President of National Horticulture Research & Development Foundation (NHRDF) and he is the disciplinary authority. The Director of NHRDF has initiated disciplinary proceedings and dismissed the petitioner from service. The Director who is subordinate to the President, without any authority had initiated the disciplinary proceedings and dismissed the petitioner from service. On this ground alone, the order of dismissal is liable to be set aside.

(ii) The Labour Court did not even consider the contentions of the petitioner that the Director of NHRDF did not have authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings and dismiss the petitioner from service.

(iii) The enquiry was not conducted in a fair and proper manner and it was conducted in violation of principles of natural justice.

(iv) The 1st respo