Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pradeep Manikrao Chikte, was appointed as an Instructor in the Industrial Training Institute at Mehkar on a temporary basis on 4 January 1998. An appointment order was issued on 26 January 2000 fixing his salary in the scale of Rs. 5,000-8,000. Before joining, he was required to fill an application form containing various details, including a query at clause (11) asking whether he had ever been prosecuted, disqualified by any Public Service Commission, debarred from appearing in any examination, or had any case pending against him in any court of law. The petitioner answered 'No' to this query. Subsequently, the employer discovered that a criminal case was pending against the petitioner and terminated his services on the ground of suppression of material fact. The petitioner challenged the termination by filing a complaint under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 before the Labour Court, Buldana. The Labour Court dismissed the complaint, holding that the termination was justified. The petitioner then filed a revision before the Industrial Court, Akola, which also dismissed the revision. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The High Court observed that the petitioner had already been acquitted in the criminal case and that the employer had not considered the nature and gravity of the offence. The court held that the termination was not justified and amounted to an unfair labour practice. The court set aside the orders of the Labour Court and Industrial Court and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and 50% back wages.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Suppression of Material Fact - Termination - The petitioner was appointed as Instructor in an Industrial Training Institute and was required to fill an application form disclosing whether he had ever been prosecuted or had any pending case. He answered 'No' to the query, but later it was found that a criminal case was pending against him. The employer terminated his services on the ground of suppression of material fact. The Labour Court and Industrial Court upheld the termination. The High Court held that the termination was not justified as the employer failed to consider the nature and gravity of the offence and the fact that the petitioner had already been acquitted in the criminal case. The court set aside the termination and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% back wages. (Paras 1-10) B) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Discharge from Service - The termination of the petitioner's service without considering the nature and gravity of the alleged suppression amounted to an unfair labour practice under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The court held that the employer must consider all relevant factors before taking such a drastic step. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioner's service on the ground of suppression of a pending criminal case in the application form was justified, and whether the Labour Court and Industrial Court erred in upholding the termination.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders of the Labour Court and Industrial Court, and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and 50% back wages.
Law Points
- Suppression of material fact
- Termination of service
- Pending criminal case
- Discharge from service
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act
- 1971
