9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1963 (4) TMI 66 - SC - Indian LawsTo what relief the suspended workmen whose names are mentioned in list A are entitled ? Whether the termination of employment of the workmen whose names are mentioned in list B was justified ? Are they entitled to reinstatement and/or compensation ? Held that - Coming to the case of the four workmen whose services have been allowed to be terminated. Nothing was urged before us with respect to the order permitting termination of service. Nor do we think that the order of the tribunal in this behalf is wrong. In their case the tribunal has said that if the inquiry proceedings had not been defective these four persons would be liable to dismissal as ordered by the appellant. It is only because there was defect in the inquiry proceedings as stated above that it was held that the dismissal was unjustified. The tribunal therefore went on to permit the termination of service of these four workmen under one of the standing orders and finally ordered payment of wages for a period of one month alongwith compensation at the rate of 15 days average wages for every completed year of service or any part thereof in excess of six months.
Issues Involved:
1. Relief for suspended workmen (List 'A'). 2. Justification for termination of employment of workmen (List 'B') and their entitlement to reinstatement and/or compensation. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Relief for Suspended Workmen (List 'A') Background and Genesis of Dispute: The dispute originated from the workmen's alleged slow-down tactics and subsequent strikes in various departments of the appellant's company. This led to the suspension of 1600 workmen and an agreement on December 23, 1957, which allowed for the suspension of 30 workmen pending inquiry and disciplinary action. Tribunal's Decision: - Groups and Reinstatements: The tribunal divided the 24 workmen into five groups. The appeal concerning six workmen was not pressed by the appellant. For the five workmen in Group II, the tribunal ordered reinstatement with compensation amounting to fifteen months' wages. The appellant challenged this decision. - Evidence and Tribunal's Findings: The tribunal found no proof of go-slow tactics for the five workmen in Group II, dismissing the appellant's documentary evidence (Exs. AA and AA-1) as unreliable. The tribunal concluded that the evidence on other charges was also considered and found unworthy of acceptance. - General Award of Wages: The tribunal awarded 12 months' wages to all 24 suspended workmen based on the interpretation of the agreement dated December 23, 1957. The appellant contended that clause (7) of the agreement, which denied wages for the suspension period, applied to all suspended workmen. Supreme Court's Analysis: - Clause Interpretation: The Supreme Court agreed that clause (7) applied to all suspended workmen but only referred to the suspension period up to the date of the agreement, not to future suspensions. Consequently, the tribunal was justified in granting wages for the suspension period after the agreement to those reinstated. - Inquiries and Natural Justice: The inquiries for the five workmen were found to violate principles of natural justice as the witnesses were not examined-in-chief, and the workmen were not given copies of statements in advance. The tribunal's finding that the inquiries were vitiated was upheld. Issue 2: Justification for Termination of Employment (List 'B') Tribunal's Decision: - Inquiries and Misconduct: The tribunal found the inquiries against the five workmen (List 'B') violated principles of natural justice. Despite this, it permitted the termination of service for four of these workmen, reinstating only one. - Evidence and Charges: The tribunal considered evidence against the nine workmen in Group III (List 'A') and found them guilty of inciting other workers to slow down work. The tribunal's conclusions were expressed inappropriately, suggesting deliberate go-slow tactics, but the substance of the findings was accepted. Supreme Court's Analysis: - Inappropriate Expression of Findings: The Supreme Court noted the tribunal's inappropriate expression of conclusions but upheld the findings of incitement to slow down work. - Full Wages for Reinstated Workmen: The Supreme Court allowed full wages from December 24, 1957, for the 15 reinstated workmen in List 'A' and Hiralal Bhomick from List 'B'. - Dismissal and Compensation: The nine dismissed workmen from List 'A' and four from List 'B' were entitled to full wages till the award's enforcement date, following the principle in the Sasa Musa case. Final Orders: - Management's Appeal (C.A. 425 of 1962): Dismissed. - Workmen's Appeal (C.A. 426 of 1962): Allowed in part, granting full wages to reinstated workmen as specified. The judgment comprehensively addressed the issues of suspension, termination, and compensation, applying principles of natural justice and interpreting the agreement clauses in light of established legal precedents.
|
