Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Management of M/s MRF Limited – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum- Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J.
All these Writ Appeals are filed aggrieved by the common order, dated 14.03.2024, passed by learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.25064 and 28129 of 2011, which were filed challenging the Award dated 18.07.2011 passed by the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad, in I.D.No.74 of 2008, therefore, all the Writ Appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The employer filed W.A.Nos.315 and 316 of 2024 assailing the common order dated 14.03.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.25064 and 28129 of 2011, respectively, whereunder W.P.No.25064 of 2011 was dismissed and W.P.No.28129 of 2011 was allowed quashing the impugned Award of the Labour Court insofar as treating the workman as a fresh workman and also treating the out of service period as ‘not on duty’ with continuity of service.
3. The workman filed W.A.No.649 of 2024 against the order passed in W.P.No.28129 of 2011, insofar as not granting monetary benefits for the out of service period though the same was ordered to be treated as ‘on duty’.
4. For convenience, hereinafter the parties are referred to as they are arrayed before the Labour Court.
5. Heard Sri M.Radhakrishna Murthy,
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....
The Labour Court cannot interfere with the punishment order if the departmental inquiry is fair and proper.
The absence of a fair opportunity to cross-examine witnesses renders a disciplinary enquiry invalid, and charges not substantiated by evidence cannot warrant dismissal.
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....
Labour Courts must refrain from re-evaluating evidence after confirming the fairness of a disciplinary inquiry; interference is only permissible when findings are perverse or lack evidence.
The court upheld the Labour Court's ruling that the dismissal of the workman was disproportionate to the misconduct proven, awarding compensation instead of reinstatement.
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 ....
Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to reappraise the evidence and come to its conclusion enures to it when it has to adjudicate upon the dispute referred to it in which an employer relies on the findings r....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
