JUDGMENT :

T.S. Thakur, J.

Leave granted. The short question that falls for determination in these appeals is whether the High Court so also the Courts below were right in holding that the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Appellant-company against its employees (Respondents herein) ought to remain stayed pending conclusion of the criminal case instituted against the Respondents in respect of the very same incident.

2. The Appellant company is engaged in the manufacture of automobile parts in the name and style of M/s. Stanzen Toyotetsu India Pvt. Ltd. while the Respondents are workmen engaged by the Appellant in connection with the said business. It is not in dispute that the employees of the Appellant-company including the Respondents are governed by Standing Orders certified under Industrial Employees (Standing Orders) Act, 1946.

3. The Appellant's case is that on 19th March, 2011 at about 10.30 p.m. the Respondents with the help of other Trade Union functionaries stage managed an accident making it appear as if an employee by the name of Mr. Kusumadhara had slipped and fallen in the press area. The incident was, it is alleged, used as a ruse by the Respondents who rushed to the place of alleged fall only to create a ruckus. Appellant's further case is that although Mr. Kusumadhara had not sustained any injury, he was sent to the hospital in the ambulance of the Appellant-company and that instead of resuming the work after the alleged incident, the Respondents stopped the production activity and started abusing their superiors, damaged property of the company and even assaulted senior managerial personnel. These acts of indiscipline created an atmosphere of fear and tension in the factory and brought the production activity to a grinding halt. Senior managerial personnel injured in the incident were, according to the Appellant, unable to report for work for about 15 days on account of assault on them.

4. Taking note of the incident and the acts of indiscipline which amounted to misconduct under several provisions of the Standing Order, the competent authority placed the Respondents under suspension and issued charge-sheets to them. The explanation submitted by the Respondents having been found unsatisfactory, a disciplinary enquiry was initiated and Enquiry Officers appointed to enquire into the allegations against the Respondents. The Presenting Officers have examined one witness in each one of the enquiries.

5. The incident in question was it appears reported even to the police by one of the employees of the Appellant-company who was a witness to the same, leading to the registration of Crime No. 173/2011 in Ramanagara Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 324, 356, 427, 504, 506, 114 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code A charge-sheet was filed pursuant to the said report and investigation is pending in which the Respondents are accused of committing the offences mentioned above.

6. While the disciplinary enquiry and the criminal case were both pending, the Respondents filed Original Suits No. 326-331 of 2011 in which they prayed for a permanent injunction against the Appellant and the Enquiry Officers restraining them from proceeding with the enquiry pending conclusion of the criminal case. Interlocutory Applications seeking temporary injunctions in each one of the suits against the on-going enquiry were also filed in the said suits. The applications though opposed by the Appellant-company were allowed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Ramanagara by an order dated 13th October, 2011 staying the domestic enquiry pending against the Respondents till the disposal of criminal case in C.C. No. 1005 of 2011.

7. Misc. Appeals No. 56/2011 and 61/2011 filed by the Appellant against the said order before the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM Ramanagara having failed, the Appellant filed Writ Petitions No. 8487-8491 of 2012 (GM-Code of Civil Procedure) and W.P. No. 9381 of 2012 (GM-Co