Low Hop Bing J:

Issue

The applicant ("employer") by way of a notice of motion in encl. (11) is applying for an order of certiorari to quash Industrial Court Award No. 32 of 1993 handed down on 5 February 1993 ("the award"). The sole issue before me, as was before the Industrial Court, is whether the respondent ("employee") has been dismissed "without just cause or excuse" by the employer.

Facts

The employee joined the employer on 5 January 1985 as an assistant security manager.On 13 August 1987, the employer constituted a board of domestic inquiry to conduct an inquiry against the employee.At the inquiry, four charges were preferred against the employee.The gravamen of these four charges are as follows:

1. Absence without approval of leave from 1 July 1987 to 20 July 1987

2. Declaring false attendance and misleading the management of his duties and responsibilities;

3. Inability to perform the job of an assistant security manager by failing to observe company rules and regulations on staff punctuality and movements; and

4. Habitual lateness from 21 July 1987 to 31 July 1987 and on 10 August 1987.

At the inquiry, the employee was given full opportunity to conduct his defence, examine his witness and cross-examine the employer's witnesses.After due inquiry, the board of inquiry came to the following specific finding:

1. With the exception of 14 to 16 July 1987, the employee was unable to provide concrete evidence to support his presence from 1 to 20 July 1987;

2. In response to the warning letter issued by the employee's superior, the employee furnished a time sheet for the period from 1 to 20 July 1987 to support his whereabouts, the accuracy of which was doubted by the board of inquiry as the facts do not correspond with the records of the witnesses;

3. Although the employee was fully aware of the employer's rules and regulations on staff punctuality and movements, he has chosen not to comply with them; and

4. The punch card showed that the employee was habitually late for work.

By reason of the aforesaid specific finding, the board of inquiry came to the conclusion that all the charges against the employee have been proved and submitted a report for the employer's consideration and decision.

The employer vide letter dated 3 September 1987 addressed to and acknowledged by the employee notified the employee of the result of the inquiry and his dismissal with immediate effect.

Thereafter the employee did not exhaust his right to appeal to the executive director within 14 days from the date of receipt of the letter dated 3 September 1987.There was no allegation that the employer has committed a breach of the rules of natural justice, as indeed the employer has carefully complied with the rules of natural justice.

Apparently, the employee instead made his representations under s. 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act 1967. Subsequent thereto, on 29 September 1988, the Honourable Minister referred the employee's representations to the Industrial Court for an award.

On 5 February 1993, the Industrial Court drew an inference that the dismissal of the employee was mala fide, victimisation and an unfair labour practice.That being the case, the Industrial Court found that the employee was dismissed by the applicant without just cause or excuse, and made consequential orders relating to back wages, or in lieu of reinstatement, one month wages for every year of the respondent's service or proportionately, for part of a year ("the award").

The employer filed the present application for certiorari to quash the award.

Ground Of Application

The applicant contends that in making the award, the Industrial Court made an error of law and/jurisdiction on the following grounds:

1. The Industrial Court failed to give due consideration to the domestic enquiry which resulted in the dismissal of the employee.

2. The Industrial Court failed to take into account the doctrine of exhaustion of domestic remedies.

3. The Industrial Court's decision was p