9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog1971 (2) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst Borgohain a chit (Ex. 12) was produced by him which suggested H. P. Bhagavati's collusion with Borgohain in this affair. Bhagavati was accordingly also charge sheeted and after domestic enquiry he was dismissed with effect from March 23, 1961. This order of dismissal of Bhagavati gave rise to an industrial dispute which was duly referred to the Labour Court of Assam at Dibrugarh. The Labour Court by its award dated October 30, 1969 held that the contents of Ex. 12 were too vague to connect Bhagavati with the offence charged. According to the Labour Court the management had procured this exhibit only to harass Bhagavati for no fault of his. The domestic enquiry was also found to be violative of the principle of natural' justice and it conclusions perverse, there being no evidence to support them. Bhagavati was accordingly held entitled to reinstatement with all the back wages and benefits. The present appeal is directed against this order and, as observed earlier, the only question we have to decide is whether Bhagavati should be reinstated or he should be paid compensation instead of reinstatement. The dismissal of Borgohain, it may be pointed out, was not challenged by him and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch a stenographer. On the assumption that the respondent was made to take dictation and type out letters in connection with other concerns in which the appellant company was interested and the respondent was not paid any extra remuneration for such work, the respondent was, on his 'admission retaining with him surreptitiously copies of those communications. As the tribunal has remarked, the respondent did so in order to preserve evidence, that he was made to take down letters relating to concerns other than the appellant-company. Whether in terms of his employment as a stenographer the regional manager could take such work or not is a matter in which we need not go, but he did admittedly retain with him copies of as many as 32 such communications which he exhibited as Exs. W. 10 to W. 42. These copies were clearly the property of the company which the respondent in no event could retain in his possession without the consent of his employers. If the regional manager were to entertain a feeling that, if reinstated, the respondent would in future also retain with him copies of documents of a confidential nature whenever the respondent felt that such retention would be of use or advant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing it were properly done and made, that the company ought to have disclosed it to the workman and given him an opportunity to vindicate himself and that the nondisclosure of the report made the termination illegal and unjustified. That may or may not be right. But what was relevant, at the stage when the Tribunal came to decide what relief the workman was entitled to, was the question whether the management genuinely apprehended as a result of the report that, it would be risky to retain the workman in the company service They may have gone wrong in the manner of terminating the workman's service as held by the Tribunal. But, if the management truly believed that it was not possible to retain the workman in the company's service on grounds of security and consequently could not place confidence in him any longer, the present case, would be one of those exceptional cases where the general rule as to reinstatement could not properly be applied. This of course does not mean that in every case where the employer says that he has lost confidence in the workman, and, therefore, has terminated his service that reinstatement cannot be granted and the Tribunal has to award compensation. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... achers (P) Ltd . ()[1968] 1 L.L.J 529), (a decision High Court). In the Punjab National Bank case(supra)) it was observed that the propriety of reinstatement in a case of wrongful or illegal dismissal-is' normally a question of fact and where the industrial tribunal on a proper consideration of the relevant factors refuses to pass such an order the Supreme Court would be reluctant in the absence of any general or substantial question of law to interfere under Art. 136 of the Constitution. According to the counsel where reinstatement has been ordered by the court or tribunal in an industrial dispute arising out of dismissal of a workman this Court should, in 'the absence of special circumstances, decline to interfere with that order on special leave appeal. Support from the case of M. L. Bose & Co. (P) Ltd. (supra) is sought for the contention that reinstatement is the normal rule when dismissal is held to be wrongful and it is immaterial that the employer has since employed other workmen. The case of United Bleachers(supra) follows the observations of this Court in the case of Punjab National Bank Ltd. (supra), M. L. Bose & Co. (P) Ltd. (supra) and Swadesamitran Ltd. v. Their Workm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e were the cases where there had been strained relations between the employer and the employee, where the post held by the aggrieved employee had been one of trust and confidence or where, though dismissal or discharge was unsustainable owing to some infirmity in the impugned order, the employee was, found to have been guilty of an activity subversive of or prejudicial to the interests of the industry. These cases are to be found in Assam Oil Co. Ltd. v. Workmen([1970] I.L.L.J. 288); Workmen of Charottar Gramodhar Sahakari Mandali Ltd. v.-Charottar Gramodhar Sahakari Mandali Ltd.( C.A. 382/66 d/14.-8-1967); Doomur Dulung Tea Estate v. Workmen(C.A. 5161-1966 d/26-10-1967) and Ruby General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. P. P. Chopra ([1970] I.L.L.J.63). These are however, illustrative case,% where an exception was made to the general rule. No hard and fast rule as to which circumstances would in a given case constitute an exception to the general rule can possibly be laid down as the Tribunal in each case keeping the objectives of industrial adjudication in mind, must in a spirit of fairness and justice confront the question whether the circumstances of the case require that an exception shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appropriate trial. The suggestion that having regard to the nature, of the proceedings against Bhagavati, the management has lost confidence is unacceptable. A similar argument was repelled in the case of Assam, Match Co.(supra). If the workman is entitled as a general rule to be reinstated after his wrongful dismissal is set aside and ,on the facts it is not possible to find cogent material on which the establishment can genuinely be considered to have lost confidence in the integrity of the workman he is entitled to be reinstated. The next. argument that Bhagavati should not be forced on the management after a lapse of ten years is equally unacceptable because if his dismissal was wrongful then merely because proceedings for adjudication of the industrial dispute have taken a long time is by itself no reason for not directing his reinstatement if it is otherwise justified being in accordance with normal rule. A similar contention was also repelled in the case of Assam Match Co. In Swadesamitrans case ([1960] I.L.L.J. 504) also this Court observed that in the ,case of wrongful dismissal, discharge or retrenchment a claim for reinstatement cannot be defeated merely because time h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
