IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
The General Manager Mailam India Limited - Appellant
Versus
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Pondicherry - Respondent
W.P.No.20276 of 2010 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2010 & 1 of 2011
Decided on : 06-01-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to labour court's dismissal order against a workman for misconduct. (Para 1) |
| 2. workman's employment history and incident description. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. claims of procedural fairness in domestic enquiry. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. labour court's findings on enquiry irregularities. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. management's obligation to prove charges against the workman. (Para 9 , 14) |
| 6. management's contention on cross-examination issues. (Para 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 7. court's role under section 11a to assess whether charges were substantiated. (Para 11) |
| 8. court's view on the validity of labour court's findings. (Para 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 9. procedural fairness in domestic enquiry and opportunity for cross-examination. (Para 21) |
| 10. evaluation of evidence for charge sustainment and reinstatement. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 11. court's final decision on reinstatement and back wages. (Para 24 , 25) |
ORDER :
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
The Writ Petition is filed challenging the award of the Labour Court, Puducherry, dated 04.03.2010 made in I.D.No.12 of 2004.
2. The factual background in which the Writ Petition arises is that the Workman - M.Venkatesan was employed in the petitioner – Management with effect from November 1990. While so, on 20.06.2002 there was an incident in the petitioner – Management and the same was reported to the police immediately. The said letter as such is extracted hereunder:-
“Dear Sir,
We are engaged in the manufacture of welding electrodes at the below mentioned address since 1990. In our factory on June 12, 2002 at about 8.45 A.M two employees Mr.M.Venkatesan and Mr.M.Mohan had quarelled and hit each other which resulted in injury for both. Both the injured were sent to hospital for first aid but Mr.Venkatesan refused to go for first aid. After first aid when Mr.Mohan was coming back from hospital he was hit heavily by a group of about six persons near Sedarapet bus stop leaving him injured. After these incidents a group of about 20 people entered our factory premises on the same day evening and threatened us and our employees using harsh words. Further, the same group of people went to our Unit- II at, Mettupalayam Industrial Estate, and threatened our employees working there. Our employees coming to our factory from the nearby villages were also threatened by them on their way.
Hence for smooth functioning of the factory we would request you to give suitable protection to our factory and our employees.”
3. It is the case of the Management that thereafter the Supervisor never reported for work. Under the said circumstances, on 26.06.2002 the petitioner was given a charge sheet and the charges read thus:
“That on 12.06.2002 while you were on general shift you entered the main gate and marked your attendance at about 8.20 A.M but you arrived the shopfloor at about 8.40 A.M.
That even after coming late you have disobeyed the orders of your superior and misbehaved. You had behaved in a disorderly and rude manner with your superior and created unwanted scene, using filthy language inside the factory.
That you had suddenly assaulted your superior with an iron spanner on his head and caused severe injury and he was sent to hospital for first aid. You have given a false complaint to the police in this regard. While your superior was returning back from the hospital you and other six out siders had severely attaked him near the bus stop.
That on the same day i.e. 12.06.2002 at about 5.30 P.M you gathered near about 20 people and entered the factory premises and were trying to obstruct an ingress and e-gress of men and materials of the factory and trying to stop operations of the factory and threatened to create law and order problem. Subsequently Police men came to the factory to keep law and order. After this incident you did not turn up for duty till 19.06.2002 and subsequently you were placed under suspension with effect from 20.06.2002.
That under these circumstances mentioned above rendered yourself liable for disciplinary action. You are hereby cha

Usha Breco Mazdoor Sangh Vs. Management of Usha Breco Limited and Another
The absence of a fair opportunity to cross-examine witnesses renders a disciplinary enquiry invalid, and charges not substantiated by evidence cannot warrant dismissal.
The court reinforced that adherence to natural justice is essential in domestic enquiries, and failure to comply can invalidate disciplinary actions.
The standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings is 'preponderance of probabilities', allowing for evidence that is logically probative, and excluding strict adherence to the Indian Evidence Act pro....
The court emphasized the need for proper inquiry under the Industrial Disputes Act, affirming that wrongful termination without due process warrants reinstatement with continuity of service and back ....
Dismissal without a proper inquiry is unjustifiable; individual misconduct must be proven for disciplinary action, affirming the right to strike as a legitimate demonstration.
Misconducts - Award Modified - Workman was earning by plying rickshaw since his dismissal i.e. from 1990, appropriate relief may be moulded in favour of workman by tilting balance -Workman be paid re....
The court affirmed that a domestic enquiry must adhere to principles of natural justice, including the service of charge-sheets, and modified the award to grant only 50% back wages due to lack of evi....
Discipline and misconduct at the workplace justify dismissal; judicial review cannot re-evaluate evidence or findings of fact from disciplinary bodies.
The court upheld the dismissal of the employee for attempted theft, confirming the fairness of the domestic inquiry and the appropriateness of the punishment despite claims of procedural irregulariti....
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.