Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Baba Pandit Ghodake, challenged his termination dated 13/12/2010 w.e.f. 15/12/2010 by the respondent society, Pargaon Sudrik Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Ltd., by filing Complaint (ULP) No.79/2010 before the Labour Court. The Labour Court, by its Part-I judgment dated 10/10/2014, held that the domestic enquiry conducted against the petitioner was vitiated due to violation of principles of natural justice and that the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse. The respondent management preferred Revision (ULP) No.9/2015 before the Industrial Court, which was allowed by judgment dated 17/12/2015, setting aside the Labour Court's Part-I judgment and concluding that the enquiry was fair and proper and the findings were not perverse. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The High Court observed that the management had examined the Enquiry Officer as its witness on the first two issues regarding the fairness of the enquiry, which was impermissible as the Enquiry Officer is a quasi-judicial authority and not required to be examined. The Court relied on its earlier decision in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) to hold that the Enquiry Officer cannot be examined as a witness. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Industrial Court's judgment, and restored the Labour Court's Part-I judgment. The matter was remitted to the Labour Court for proceeding with Part-II of the complaint.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Domestic Enquiry - Fairness of Enquiry - Enquiry Officer as Witness - The Enquiry Officer is a quasi-judicial authority and a creation of Standing Orders/Service Rules, akin to a judge in a departmental enquiry. He is neither required to be arrayed as a respondent nor examined as a witness. The management's act of examining the Enquiry Officer to prove the fairness of the enquiry is impermissible. (Para 5-6) B) Industrial Law - Part-I Judgment - Revisional Jurisdiction - The Industrial Court, in revision, set aside the Labour Court's Part-I judgment that had declared the enquiry vitiated and findings perverse. The High Court noted that the Industrial Court's order was passed without considering the settled position that the Enquiry Officer cannot be examined as a witness. (Para 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court erred in setting aside the Labour Court's Part-I judgment that had vitiated the domestic enquiry for violation of natural justice, and whether the examination of the Enquiry Officer as a witness by the management was permissible.
Final Decision
Writ Petition allowed. The judgment of the Industrial Court dated 17/12/2015 in Revision (ULP) No.9/2015 is set aside. The Part-I judgment of the Labour Court dated 10/10/2014 in Complaint (ULP) No.79/2010 is restored. The Labour Court is directed to proceed with Part-II of the complaint.
Law Points
- Enquiry Officer is a quasi-judicial authority
- not required to be examined as a witness
- Domestic enquiry fairness
- Principles of natural justice
- Part-I judgment
- Industrial Court's revisional jurisdiction
