ORDER :

Prayer : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 30.08.2016 issued by the 2nd respondent in Memo No.491-19167-T3-TNSTC 2016, imposing him the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of one year, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to provide the petitioner suitable alternative employment/light job/office-desk work w.e.f. from 26.12.2015 with continuity of service, backwages and pay protection and all other service and consequential benefits and restore and credit the leave granted and sanctioned to him for the period from 25.12.2015 to 31.01.2016 to his leave account.

The punishment of stopping of increment for one year imposed on the writ petitioner is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner was working as Driver in the respondent Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Salem) Ltd., A charge memorandum was issued with an allegation of unauthorized absence and the petitioner submitted his explanation denying the charges and the learned counsel for the petitioner states that without conducting any proper enquiry, the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year was imposed on the writ petitioner.

3. There is a growing trend of filing writ petition without approaching the Labour Court by the workmen. Such practice would result in an anomaly in dealing with labour matters by the High Court. There is a possibility of inconsistency in dealing with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, terms and conditions of the service under the settlements between the Management and the Labour Unions.

3. Under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and under the Trade Unions Act, the trade union plays a vital role in protecting the interest of the workmen who all are their members. Whenever there is a violation of the service conditions under the settlement or violation under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, the union has to initiate appropriate action for the purpose of protecting their own members, who all are workmen. This being the very basic concept of trade union under the provisions of the Trade Union Act, this Court is of an opinion that in the event of any lapses, dereliction of duty or violation on the part of the trade union or by its office bearers, then they are liable to be prosecuted or they must be held responsible and accountable for all the losses including the financial losses caused to the workmen. The office bearers of the trade union cannot shirk their responsibility as they are the signatory in 12(3) settlement and determining the service rights and conditions of the workmen. Therefore, the office bearers of the trade unions are acting as Trustees as far as the workmen are concerned. Their duty is of paramount importance under the provisions of the statute.

4. There is a large scale allegation placed before this Court that the trade unions are not protecting the interest of the workmen and not assisting the workmen at the time of distress. In other words, it is contended that the trade unions are not initiating steps to assist the workmen for the purpose of challenging the various punishments imposed. Such a conduct of the trade unions are to be depricated. The trade union office bearers being trustees are responsible and accountable and in the event of any failure in this regard, they must be prosecuted under the relevant provisions and further, the workman concerned have to initiate steps even to recover the financial loss if any caused to the workman.

5. Large number of writ petitions are filed before the High Court without exhausting the remedy contemplated under the Industrial Disputes Act i.e, the Labour Court. Labour Court is a judicial forum presided over by the learned District Judges. Therefore, the disputes are to be adjudicated by conducting a trial elaborately based on the documents and evidence. If su