Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ADMINISTRATIOR MANAGER DIRECTOR OKHALA KISAN SES versus P.O.LABOUR COURT & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Administratior Manager Director Okhala Kisan Ses v. P.O.Labour Court & Others - WRIT - C No. 1382 of 1987 [2007] RD-AH 8113 (1 May 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon.Tarun Agarwala, J.

List has been revised. No one appears for the respondents.

The dispute with regard to validity and legality of the termination of the workman was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. The Labour Court has set aside the order of termination and had directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service with back wages. The employer being aggrieved by the said award has filed the present writ petition. The order of termination has been set aside on the sole ground that no domestic inquiry was initiated by the employer and therefore, the order of termination was in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Labour Court thereafter proceeded and held that the provisions of Section 6-N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act was not applied and consequently, the termination of the workman was illegal and against the provisions of Section 6-N of the Act. Consequently, the Labour Court directed reinstatement with continuity of service and with full back wages.

From a perusal of the award, it transpires, that a charge-sheet was  issued to the workman and inspite  of service of the charge sheet, the workman did not submit any reply. Consequently, the charges remained unrebutted. Once it is found, that the workman had not denied the charges, the question of initiating a domestic inquiry did not arise. It is open to the employer to straightaway pass an order of punishment.  No oral inquiry is necessary where the charges are admitted by the workman.

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned award cannot be sustained and is quashed. The writ petition is allowed.

Dated:1.5.2007

AKJ(WP 1382/87)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.