IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
M/s Iti Ltd. Durbhash Nagar Raebareli – Petitioner
Versus
Devi Shankar Mishra and Anr. – Respondents
Writ C. No. 24021 Of 2020
Decided On : 28-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to award and removal process. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. issues with inquiry process. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. arguments regarding enquiry fairness. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. need for proper evidence and opportunity. (Para 28 , 29 , 32 , 33) |
| 5. court's decision on back wages and removal. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
Heard.
2. By means of present writ petition, a challenge has been made to the award dated 11.02.2020 published on 26.06.2020 as also to the order dated 29.03.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow in Adjudication Case No. 48 of 2004 (Devi Shankar Mishra vs. ITI Limited, Raebareli). The consequential relief has also been sought in the instant writ petition, which is as under:-
3. The subject matter of the present petition relates to removal of opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra. At relevant time, as appears from the records, the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra was the employee of the Switch Assembly Shop of the petitioner and was also the President of Employees' Union of Petitioner.
4. Prior to removal vide order dated 01.03.1990, the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra was suspended vide order dated 28.04.1984 and thereafter, a charge sheet dated 30.04.1984 was served upon him for holding "Regular Enquiry" and in response to the same, the delinquent submitted his reply on 14.05.1984.
5. Facts related to initiation of aforesaid disciplinary proceedings, as per management/petitioner, as appears from the record are that on 27.04.1984 the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra, President of Workers' Union, alongwith 10-15 employees' of the petitioner entered the office/chamber of one Sri R.C. Gupta, Material Manager, in relation to cause related to transfer of employees' and there the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra misbehaved with Sri R.C.Gupta and thereafter, on a complaint of Sri R.C. Gupta the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra was subjected to disciplinary proceedings.
6. Enquiry Committee was constituted to hold the enquiry against the opposite party No. 1/Devi Shankar Mishra. The Enquiry Committee after conclusion of enquiry, which appears to be concluded in August, 1985, submitted its report vide letter dated 15.02.1988, signed on 25.02.1988. The enquiry report is extracted herein below:-
After receipt of the orders of enquiry parties i.e. charge sheeted employee Shri D.S. Mishra, Shri R.C. Saxena Presenting Officer were intimated vide committee's letter DGM(Projy/30 dated 13-9-1984 fixing the date of enquiry as 29-9-1984 at 10.00 AM in the Engineering Building, Crossbar.
On the date fixed and duly informed, the enquiry was started in the present of the parties i.c. charge sheeted employee and management representation. Delinquent employee has placed a request on 27.9.1981 before the enquiry committee that he may be allowed to engage a co-worker. He was permitted for the same. On 5-10- 1984 delinquent employee nominated Shri A.K. Srivastava, St. No. 1435-72 for pleading his case before the enquiry committee. His request was considered and he was allowed to engage the coworker named above and was asked to be present on 12.10.1984 alongwith his representation before the enquiry committee on 1
State of U.P. Vs. Shatrughan Lal 1998 (6) SCC 651
Anil Kumar Vs. Presiding Officer and others AIR 1985 SC 1121
Roop Singh Negi Vs. Punjab National Bank and others (2009) 2 SCC 570
Disciplinary actions by employers must comply with fair enquiry standards; failure to allow cross-examination does not nullify properly conducted proceedings.
An inquiry conducted under the MEPS Act must adhere to the principles of natural justice, including the right to cross-examine witnesses and the requirement for impartiality in the inquiry process. A....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the violation of employee rights under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, and the rules fra....
An employer must conduct a proper departmental enquiry before terminating an employee for misconduct; failure to do so renders the termination unjustified.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in a disciplinary proceeding, the charged officer must be provided with an opportunity to defend against the evidence presented by the prosecu....
A disciplinary inquiry must be conducted in accordance with natural justice principles, and the burden of proof lies on the employee to challenge the validity of the inquiry and dismissal. The court ....
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.