JUDGMENT

Hue Siew Kheng JC:

[1] This is an application for an order of certiorari seeking to quash Industrial Court Award No. 2281/2005 dated 9 December 2005 wherein the dismissal of the applicant was upheld by the Industrial Court in Johor Bahru.

[2] The applicant was appointed as a vendor manager by the respondent company (the company) and commenced work on 20 January 1998. He was subsequently confirmed in his position on 20 July 1998.

[3] On 28 June 1999 the applicant was served with a letter of suspension and was informed that an inquiry would be held. On 2 July 1999 the applicant attended the inquiry and answered the four allegations levelled against him. On 8 July 1999 the company served him with a letter of dismissal.

[4] The four charges that the applicant had to answer were as follows:

First charge

That you have gained unfair pecuniary advantage from the company by claiming mileage charges for at least two (2) outstation trips when on record you had also for the same two (2) trips been issued with airline tickets in your name, the particulars of which are as follows:

(a) Outstation trip to Johor Bahru between 13 November 1998 and 16 November 1998; and

(b) Outstation trip to Penang between 13 April 1998 and 14 April 1998.

Second charge

That you have breached clause 6.3 of the Company's Standing Instruction (CSI) (revised on 2 May 1988) under reference no. CSI B.4 which stipulates as follows:

6.3. Entertainment expenses at hotels or restaurants shall not be settled via a direct billing to the company. The most senior person (other than visitors to the market unit) shall settle the bill and claim reimbursement via a Travel Expense Statement to be approved by his superior who would not have attended such entertainment.

The company now has reason to believe that you were fully aware of the full implication of the said CSI when you breached the same. The particulars of the breach are as follows:

On at least 14 different occasions you participated in having meals with at least two of your subordinates and in each of these 14 occasions you allowed your subordinates to pay for such meals expenses. Your subordinates in turn claimed these meal expenses in their routine expense statement; some of which were authorized by yourself, and these expense statements were subsequently honoured by the company.

Despite having participated in all of the 14 occasions stated in above paragraph, you in turn gained unfair pecuniary advantage from the company by claiming in your own right, meal expenses not in excess of RM10 per occasion under the unreceipted system.

Your conduct as aforesaid, clearly demonstrate your state of mind in that by doing so, you willfully and intentionally attempt to defraud the company by gaining unfair pecuniary advantage in claiming for meal allowances on occasions in which you had already enjoyed the meals at the expense of the company.

Third charge

That you intentionally breached the company's policy on market returns in that on at least one (1) occasion you instructed your subordinate to prepare a Survey Sale Document No. 157730 dated 25 August 1998, knowing fully well that you were not able to show to the said subordinate the physical stock to be jobbed. It was further alleged that when queried by your subordinate, you assured your subordinate that the subject matter of the market return had been destroyed by you the previous day. We now have reasons to believe that you were fully aware that you acted in breach of the required practices of the company pertaining to market returns in that of the need to be fully transparent in market returns exercise.

Fourth charge

That you abused your position as a senior officer of the company by committing certain unfair practices against a vendor called Nippy Trading in that on 24 April 1998 you approved two (2) Survey Sale Document nos. 156411 and 156153 (written by two separate persons) when in the normal course of business only one Survey Sale document would suffice thus creating the impress