J U D G M E N T

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J. (Oral)

1. Present writ petitions have been filed seeking the following prayers:

“Issue a Writ of certiorari and or any other appropriate Writ or directions or order to set aside and quash the impugned orders dated 16.02.2022 passed by Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum-Labour Court - II, Dwarka Court, Delhi in D.I.D. No. 76 of 2014 and D.I.D. No.63 of 2014 and upheld the domestic enquiry proceedings”

2. Learned counsel for respondent no.2/workman has disputed as to the maintainability of the writ petitions. Learned counsel submits that the present writ petitions have been filed only to delay the trial and are thus liable to be rejected.

3. Dr. Lalit Bhasin, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that in fact in the impugned order the learned labour court has overlooked the directions passed by this court in W.P.(C) 426/2019 and W.P.(C) 472/2019 titled as Air India Ltd. vs. Sanjay Kaura and Air India Ltd. vs. FG Runda vide order dated 03.07.2019. Learned senior counsel submits that in terms of this, learned Labour Court was firstly directed to examine the case of the parties afresh in terms of the principles laid down in State Bank of Travancore v. Prem Singh, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8258. Dr. Bhasin submits that instead of following the directions of this court, learned Labour Court has directed the petitioner to bring evidence to prove the enquiry which has been set aside by the learned Labour court on account of being in violation of principles of natural justice. It would be advantageous to refer to certain background facts in brief. The claimants herein were employees of AIR India Ltd. The charge-sheet of misconduct was served on them and a domestic enquiry was conducted in 2003. At the end of the enquiry, the appropriate disciplinary authority passed an order of dismissal against the claimants with effect from 13.07.2012. and 22.01.2013. The departmental appeal filed against this order was dismissed by order dated 21.06.2013 and 31.07.2013.

4. The respondents/workmen raised an industrial dispute which was referred by the appropriate authority to the learned CGIT. In the CGIT, a preliminary issue was framed as to the fact that whether the enquiry was held in violation of the principles of natural justice. The tribunal vide order dated 10.08.2018, inter alia held that the domestic enquiry against the claimants was conducted in violation of principles of natural justice to the prejudice of the workmen in an unfair manner. The petitioner management challenged this order before this court vide W.P.(C) Nos. 426/2019 and 475/2019. This court while disposing of these writ petitions inter alia held as under:

4. Mr. Lalit Bhasin, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these are clear cases of loss of confidence by the petitioner in the respondents and no inquiry was required to be conducted by the petitioner for the first instance as per the principles laid down by this Court in State Bank of Travancore v. Prem Singh, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8258 in which this Court held that the employee can be terminated without inquiry in the case of loss of confidence. This Court further held that even if the inquiry was held to be bad, the employee is not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both these cases are squarely covered by the principles laid down by this Court in State Bank of Travancore (supra) and, therefore, even if the inquiry is held to be vitiated, the respondents are not entitled to reinstatement but only compensation. It is submitted that this submission is without prejudice to the petitioner’s case that there has been no violation of principles of the natural justice. It is further submitted that the learned Industrial Tribunal be directed to hear the matter afresh in terms of the principles laid down by this Court in State Bank of Travancore (supra).

6. Learned counsel for t