Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, The Indian Seamless Metal Tubes Limited, is a factory covered under the Factories Act, 1948. The respondent workman was appointed on 01-01-1984. He filed Complaint (ULP) No. 265/1987 before the Industrial Court at Ahmednagar on 02-12-1987, claiming permanency and incidental benefits. The complaint was allowed, holding that the employer had indulged in unfair labour practices under item 6 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act by engaging the respondent as a temporary worker with intent to deprive him of permanency, and also under item 9 for non-compliance of Standing Order 4(C) of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. Subsequently, the respondent was charge-sheeted on 14-09-1989 for refusing to work, leaving the workplace, sitting idle, and speaking arrogantly. He refused to accept the charge-sheet, so another was served on 16-09-1989. A domestic enquiry was held, and the Enquiry Officer found him guilty under Standing Orders 24(a) and 24(x), but not under 24(k) and 24(l). The employer dismissed him on 15-04-1991. It was conceded that the enquiry report was given to the respondent along with the dismissal order, not before. The respondent challenged the dismissal by filing Complaint (ULP) No. 52/1991 before the Labour Court, alleging that the employer, aggrieved by his claim of permanency, had charged him with misconduct. The Labour Court allowed the complaint, holding that the non-supply of the enquiry report before dismissal violated natural justice and that the dismissal was an unfair labour practice. The Industrial Court upheld the Labour Court's order and directed reinstatement with full back wages. The employer filed the present writ petition challenging the Industrial Court's order. The High Court held that the non-supply of the enquiry report before dismissal is indeed a violation of natural justice, but the Industrial Court erred in ordering reinstatement with full back wages without considering the gravity of the misconduct. The High Court set aside the Industrial Court's order and remanded the matter to the Industrial Court for fresh consideration on the question of punishment, directing that the workman be given an opportunity to be heard.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Non-supply of Enquiry Report - The employer dismissed the workman after a domestic enquiry but did not supply the enquiry report to the workman before the dismissal order. The Labour Court and Industrial Court held that this violated natural justice and amounted to unfair labour practice under item 6 of Schedule IV of the MRTU & PULP Act. The High Court upheld the finding that non-supply of the enquiry report before dismissal is a breach of natural justice, but set aside the Industrial Court's order for reinstatement with full back wages and remanded the matter for fresh consideration on punishment. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the non-supply of the enquiry report to the workman before the order of dismissal amounts to a violation of principles of natural justice and renders the dismissal invalid.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition in part. It held that the non-supply of the enquiry report before dismissal is a violation of natural justice, but the Industrial Court erred in ordering reinstatement with full back wages without considering the gravity of the misconduct. The matter was remanded to the Industrial Court for fresh consideration on the question of punishment, with an opportunity to the workman to be heard.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- non-supply of enquiry report
- unfair labour practice
- MRTU & PULP Act
- Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act
- 1946
- Standing Order 4(C)
- Standing Order 24(a)
- Standing Order 24(x)
- item 6 Schedule IV
- item 9 Schedule IV
