Unauthorised absence for a continuous period exceeding twelve weeks justifies dismissal.

JUDGMENT :

E. Padmanabhan, J.—In W.P. No. 20534, the petitioner the Management of Madura Coats, Ltd., prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and to quash the common award, dated June 7, 1993, in I.D. No. 610 of 1990 on the file of the first respondent, Labour Court, Tirunelveli, in so far as it relates to P. Muthuvinayagam.

2. In W.P. No. 20535 of 1993, the petitioner, the very same management prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records and quash the common award dated June 7, 1993 made in I.D. No. 610 of 1990 on the file of the said Labour Court in so far as it relates to C. Dhanapandian.

3. Heard Sri John for Ramasubramaniam Associates, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Rita Chandrasekaran for Iyer and Doha, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent in both the petitions.

4. As these two writ petitions arise out of the common award of the first respondent, Labour Court, the writ petitions were taken up together and disposed of by a common order. It would be sufficient to refer to the facts in one of the writ petitions as the facts leading to the award passed by the Labour Court are identical in all respects.

5. The second respondent was an employee of the petitioner-mill. The second respondent without applying for leave and without prior permission remained absent from June 17, 1982, which absence being a violation of Standing Order 20(F), the petitioner-management framed charges by its charge-memo, dated July 27, 1982. The workman was called upon to state his objections within 48 hours by a chargememo, dated July 27, 1982. The workman was also informed that he has to attend the enquiry on July 31, 1982 at 10.00 A.M. in the mill premises at Tuticorin before the enquiry officer with witnesses. The workman was also put on notice that in event of his failing to attend the enquiry, the proceedings will be continued ex parte. The workman did not appear for the enquiry, neither they have sent an explanation nor they have sought for adjournment or postponement of the enquiry. On July 31, 1982 the enquiry officer proceeded with the enquiry as he was satisfied that the workman did not submit his explanation to the charge-memo besides notice published in the tamil daily, dated July 28, 1982.

6. The enquiry was proceeded ex-parte. Before the enquiry officer, one Rajasigamani, mill assistant was examined as M. W. 1 and M. Kasi, Administrative Office Assistant as M. W. 2. Before the enquiry officer the management marked Exhibits Ml to M16. The enquiry officer submitted his report, dated August 3, 1982, finding the workman guilty of the charge. The mill management by proceedings, dated August 4, 1982, after considering the enquiry report and while concurring with the report as well as on an independent assessment of the evidence made available before the enquiry officer concluded that the workman had absented himself without any reasonable cause and the absence for more than the stipulated period being a violation of Standing Order 20(F) proposed to impose the punishment of dismissal from service and called upon the workman by its proceedings, dated August 4, 1982, to state his objections, if any.

7. The said show-cause notice returned unserved as obviously the workman had left his normal place of residence. Thereafter by proceedings, dated August 21, 1982, the mill management confirmed its proposed penalty of dismissal on the worker with effect from August 4, 1982.

8. After a lapse of two months on October 29, 1982, the workman addressed the management complaining that when he reported for the day shift on October 25, 1982 with a written request to permit him to report he had not been permitted to work and therefore he has sent a request by registered post on October 29, 1982.

9. Thereafter complaining that the workman has been denied employment illegally, they raised an industrial dispute and the same has been referred to the first respondent-Labour Court in I.D.