2015 (7) TMI 1431 - HC - Indian Laws

Dismissal from the service - respondent was granted 50% backwages from the date of attaining superannuation - HELD THAT - It is apparent that the Labour Court has erred in deciding the preliminary issues concerning the fairness of the enquiry and the findings of the enquiry officer along with all the issues while delivering the impugned judgment. The procedure laid down in law which has been considered by this Court and followed in the case of MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VERSUS SYED SAHEBLAL SYED NIJAM 2014 (5) TMI 1229 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT has not been followed by the Labour Court. It could not have decided the preliminary issues along with all the rest of the issues in one stroke while delivering the impugned award. For this reason alone the impugned award is rendered unsustainable. No purpose would be served by remanding the reference proceedings to the Labour Court for a decision in the light of the ratio laid down by this Court in the case of MAHARASHTRA STATE CO-OPERATIVE COTTON GROWERS MARKETING FEDERATION LTD. AND ORS. VERSUS VASANT AMBADAS DESHPANDE 2014 (1) TMI 1935 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT and the MSRTC Beed case 2016 (12) TMI 1905 - SUPREME COURT since the respondent has already superannuated. His PF accumulations totalling Rs. 1, 17, 621/- have already been paid to him on 24.12.2002. The 50% of the backwages as were granted by the Labour Court in the impugned award have not been paid. The petitioner submits that the respondent is not entitled for gratuity as the charge of mis-appropriation has been proved against him which involves moral turpitude. The issue is as to whether the matter can be remitted back to the Labour Court for fresh a decision by following the procedure laid down in law. For the said purpose the respondent who is about 70 years today will have to prosecute his reference proceeding. Under fortuitous circumstances the findings of the enquiry officer have been held to be perverse by the Labour Court thereby setting aside the enquiry. This petition allowed in part by depriving the respondent / employee of gratuity. However he shall be entitled to the 50% backwages as have been granted by the Labour Court which is an amount of Rs.1, 13, 276/- approximately as stated by the petitioner.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of employee on charges of misappropriation
2. Impugned judgment and award of the Labour Court
3. Past record of the employee
4. Fairness of the enquiry process
5. Backwages and gratuity entitlement
6. Remittance of the matter back to the Labour Court
7. De novo enquiry reservation in the Written Statement

Analysis:

1. The employee was dismissed on charges of misappropriation, which led to a reference to the Labour Court. The impugned judgment set aside the dismissal and awarded the employee 50% backwages till superannuation. The petitioner argued that the employee's past record showed similar misconducts, questioning the fairness of the enquiry process.

2. The Labour Court's decision was challenged on the grounds of deciding all issues in one stroke, including the enquiry officer's findings. The Court held that the Labour Court erred in not following the proper procedure, citing precedents. Despite finding faults in the Labour Court's approach, the High Court deemed remanding the matter unnecessary due to the employee's superannuation and existing payments.

3. The issue of remitting the matter back to the Labour Court for a fresh decision arose, considering the employee's age and the need for a de novo enquiry. The Court noted the absence of reservation for a de novo enquiry in the Written Statement, making it impossible even if the domestic enquiry was set aside.

4. Ultimately, the High Court partly allowed the petition, depriving the employee of gratuity but granting the 50% backwages awarded by the Labour Court. The impugned award was modified accordingly, emphasizing the employee's deprivation of gratuity due to the proved charge of moral turpitude. The rule was made partly absolute in these terms.