****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral)

CM-2341-LPA-2026

The present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal.

For the reasons recorded in the application, the same is allowed.

The delay of 12 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned.

Main case

1. The present is an intra-Court appeal filed assailing the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 18.02.2026 in CWP No. 37773 of 2025. The aforesaid writ petition was filed assailing the award passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh dated 02.07.2025 (Annexure P-16), whereby the reference was answered in favour of the respondent No.2/workman and he was declared to be entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service till superannuation with full wages. The age of attaining superannuation of respondent No.2/workman was in the year 2016.

2. By way of the aforesaid impugned judgment, the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed and the award was upheld. However, it was modified to a limited extent of reducing the full back wages to 75% of back wages. Respondent No.2/workman had filed a claim statement, which was treated as a reference under Section 10(1) (C) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It was the claim of respondent No.2/workman that he had joined the services of the appellant/Management in the year 1978 as an Apprentice Trainee and thereafter was regularized w.e.f. 17.03.1979 on the post of Clerk-cum-Cashier. Thereafter, in the year 2004, respondent No.2 was posted as Special Assistant in one of the branches of the appellant-Bank at Patiala. However, on 31.08.2006, he was placed under suspension and afterwards he was served with a show cause notice. Later on, he was also charge-sheeted on 18.12.2006. An inquiry was conducted and thereafter an order of punishment was imposed upon him by way of compulsory retirement on 12.02.2008.

3. When the reference was made to the learned Industrial Tribunal, an order was passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal on 27.09.2018 (Annexure P-14) observing that as per the record, during the course of departmental inquiry proceedings, respondent No.2/workman was not supplied with a list of witnesses as well as the list of relied upon documents, which were mentioned in the charge-sheet which has caused prejudice to respondent No.2/workman because he was not aware at the time of the inquiry as to which were the relevant documents which are likely to be used against him because no such documents or list of witnesses were supplied to him which was therefore violative of the principles of natural justice and fatal to the inquiry. Considering the aforesaid factual position, an order was passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal on the aforesaid date i.e. 27.09.2018 by observing that the domestic inquiry conducted by the appellant /Management against respondent No.2/workman was unfair and in violation of the principles of natural justice, Thereafter, the learned Industrial Tribunal proceeded by observing and granting permission to the appellant/management to prove the charges against the workman by bringing fresh evidence or record before the learned Industrial Tribunal itself. This order was passed by granting permission for adducing fresh evidence by the appellant/Management before the learned Industrial Tribunal itself in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs. Smt.Laxmidevamma, 2001(5) SCC 433 whereby on the basis of the permission granted by the learned Industrial Tribunal, the documents can be produced at the later stage as well to prove the charges against the workman on merits and while referring to the aforesaid judgment, the learned Industrial Tribunal granted such permission that the aforesaid can be produced even at this stage.

4. In the light of the aforesaid permission being granted by the learned Industrial Tribunal, an affidavit was filed by one Jatinder Singh, Manager Zonal Off