The court emphasized the integral role of procedural adherence in disciplinary dismissals, asserting that lapses invalidated the fairness of the dismissal process.

Parties In This Case

[1] The parties in this case are Telekom Malaysia Berhad ("TMB"), the applicant, Zulkifli Shahari, the 1st respondent, and Mahkamah Perusahaan Malaysia in Malay or Industrial Court in English, the 2nd respondent ("the Industrial Court").

[2] TMB, the applicant is a Government Linked Company ("GLC"). By a letter of Offer of Appointment dated 22 July 1996, the applicant offered the 1st respondent the position of Head of Telemedicine, Business Multimedia of the applicant with effect from 01 August 1996.

[3] The 1st respondent accepted the offer and he commenced employment with the applicant on 01 August 1996. On 11 June 2010, the 1st respondent was dismissed after the Panel of a Domestic Inquiry ("DI") unanimously found him guilty of 4 (four) out of 5 (five) charges of misconduct.

[4] Prior to his dismissal, the 1st respondent, who has served the applicant in various capacities for 14 (fourteen) years since 01 August 1996, was the Assistant General Manager, Sports Marketing, Group Marketing Division, of the applicant. His last drawn basic monthly salary was RM 13,501.00. The applicant also contributed 19% of the 1st respondent's last drawn basic monthly salary as the employer's portion to the Employees Provident Fund ("the EPF"). The applicant further paid to the 1st respondent a fixed monthly car allowance of RM 400.00.

[5] Aggrieved with his dismissal, the 1st respondent lodged a complaint with the Industrial Relations Department ("the IRD") of the Ministry of Human Resources ("HR").

[6] As the parties could not reach a reconciliation, the Right Honourable Minister of HR ("the Minister") referred the complaint to the Industrial Court under s 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967 ("the IRA 1967") for adjudication under s 30 of the 1967.

[7] On 04 March 2016, the Industrial Court delivered Award No. 231 of 2016 [[2016] 2 MELR 142; [2016] 2 ILR 93] dated 04 March 2016 ("the Award") in the Industrial Court Case No. 13(25)(27)(25)/4-564/11 ("the IC case") in favour of the 1st respondent. In the Award, the Industrial Court decided that the applicant's dismissal by the applicant on 11 June 2010 was without just cause or excuse.

[8] In the Award, the Industrial Court ordered the reinstatement of the 1st respondent to a position, which is equivalent to his previous position, with effect from 01 April 2016, without any loss of seniority together with adjustments for yearly increment, bonus, allowances and other benefits ("the monetary benefits"). In the Award, the Industrial Court also ordered the applicant to pay a sum of RM 333,624.00 (calculated at RM 13,901.00 x 24 months) ("the Award sum") to the 1st respondent as backwages. The amount of RM 13,901.00 is the total of the applicant's last drawn basic monthly salary of RM 13,501.00 and his monthly car allowance of RM 400.00 (see Tab 1, para 110, pp 65 - 67 of CCB).

1st Respondent's Pleaded Case In The IC Case

[9] The 1st respondent's pleaded case in his statement of case dated 18 November 2011 ("the statement of case), which was filed through The Chambers of Sunil Vijayan ("the 1st respondent's solicitors") is as follows:

(1) The 1st respondent reported to Dato' Ranbir Singh Nanra ("Dato' Ranbir") since 01 May 2007. When Dato' Ranbir retired, the respondent was transferred to the Marketing division;

(2) On 01 April 2008, the 1st respondent was transferred to the Sports Event Management division and he reported to one Ms Boey Wai Fun (COW-4), the General Manager of that division;

(3) The 1st respondent has been victimized since 01 April 2008. He was not promoted but Ms Boey Wai Fun (COW-4), who is more junior to him