Back
2017 Supreme(All) 600
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.
NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD SHAMSABAD, AGRA .....Petitioner
Versus
LABOUR COURT U.P., AGRA AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7928 of 2001, decided on 4th May, 2017)
Counsel :
Anil Bhushan, J.S. Pandey and Umesh Chandra Mishra for the Petitioner; C.S.C. and Rajesh Tewari for the Respondents.
Headnote:U.P. Municipal Servants Appeal Rules, 1967—Section 1(4)(e)—U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916—Section 77-A—U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947—Sections 2(z), 4(k)—Dismissal—Class IV Employees—On ground of non-observance of Principles of Natural Justice—Challenge against—Respondents fell within definition of a “public servant” given under U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976—Rightly to be considered as public servants and not workman—Not being workmen respondents could not have approached the Industrial Tribunal and Adjudication Cases could not have been entertained at all by Labour Court—Labour Court had no jurisdiction at all to conduct the domestic inquiry on its own after more than 24 years of incident—Impugned award set aside. [Paras 11 to 29]
Result; Petition Allowed.
Hon’ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, J.—This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Labour Court, Agra dated 15.2.2000 published on 6.12.2000 in Adjudication Case Nos. 154 of 1984, 155 of 1984 and 279 of 1989. All the aforesaid adjudication cases have been decided by a consolidated award.
2. Brief facts as mentioned in the writ petition and all the materials placed on record for deciding the controversy are as follows :
3. The respondent No. 2, Satya Prakash Gupta, was engaged as a Muharrir (Class-IV employee) in Nagar Palika Parishad, Shamsabad on 1.11.1968, respondent No. 3, Narbar Singh, was engaged as Muharrir (Class-IV employee) in Nagar Palika Parishad on 15.6.1966 and respondent No. 4, Narendra Kumar Jain, was engaged as Chowkidar again on a Class-IV post in Nagar Palika Parishad, Shamsabad on 8.12.1971. On a complaint being made regarding embezzlement by the three employees during their posting at octroi Check-post, they were suspended in 1974. This complaint related to the respondents not showing correct receipts of octroi at the barrier by fabricating counter-foils. After inquiry was conducted, they were dismissed in November, 1974 and all the three employees filed statutory appeals under the U.P. Municipal Servants Appeal Rules, 1967 before Commissioner, Agra Region, Agra challenging their respective dismissal orders. The statutory appeals were dismissed on 27.7.1977 by the Commissioner, Agra Region, Agra by a common order. The respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 thereafter filed separate claim petitions before the U.P. Public Service Tribunal. These claim petitions were heard together and decided on 26.8.1980 by the Tribunal. The dismissal orders were set aside on grounds of not following the Principles of Natural Justice; but liberty was given to Nagar Palika Parishad to start fresh proceedings from the stage they stood vitiated.
4. After the judgment of the Tribunal fresh inquiry was conducted against each of the respondents and inquiry reports were separately submitted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Fatehabad, Agra. On the basis of inquiry reports, all charges having been found proved, dismissal orders were passed against each of respondents separately on 17.7.1981.
5. Each of the respondents thereafter filed statutory appeals before the Commissioner, Agra Region, Agra which were dismissed on 22.2.1983. Respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 did not challenge the appellate order any further before the State Government or before the Public Service Tribunal, but this time raised an industrial dispute which was referred by the State Government to the Labour Court by reference order under Section 4-K on 26.7.1984. Adjudication Cases No. 154 of 1984, 155 of 1984 and 279 of 1989 were registered in Labour Court, Agra. All these cases were consolidated and heard together by the Labour Court. Nagar Palika Parishad filed its written statement before the Labour Court.
6. The petitioners herein filed written statement taking the following main grounds:
(a) That the reference under Section 4-K was not maintainable in the first place as dismissal orders have merged in the appellate order passed under the U.P. Municipal Servant Appeal Rules, 1967 by the Commissioner, Agra Mandal, Agra and this order had not been referred to for adjudication by the Government to the Labour Court.
(b) That the adjudication cases were barred by delay as original dismissal orders were passed in 1981 and from the date of original dismissal orders almost 25 years had lapsed and from the date of dismissal of the appeal 19 years had lapsed.
(c) That due to charge of embezzlement being levelled against the respondents which was found to be prima facie proved, there was a loss of faith and it would not be appropriate to order their reinstatement.
(d) That also w.e.f. 1.8.1990 the Government abolished the Octroi altogether and therefore, there was no post available for the respondents to be reinstated in.
7. The issue raised with regard to the
