Karnataka High Court Reserves Cross-Writ Petitions Against Labour Court Award Modifying Dismissal of Security Guard for Negligence and Insubordination to Lesser Punishment; Reinstatement Ordered with 25% Backwages. The Labour Court Set Aside Dismissal Under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Holding That Punishment Was Disproportionate, and Both Parties Challenged the Award.

Cross-writ petitions challenging a Labour Court award that modified the punishment of a dismissed security guard from dismissal to withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect and granted 25% backwages.

Workman sought quashing of the punishment of withholding increments and denial of full backwages, with a direction for reinstatement with full backwages. Employer sought quashing of the entire award and confirmation of the dismissal order.

The Disciplinary Authority dismissed the workman after a domestic enquiry found him guilty of negligence and misconduct; the Labour Court modified the punishment, leading to both parties challenging the award.

Labour Court, Mysore, in IID No.121/2007, by award dated 05.03.2014, set aside the dismissal and imposed the punishment of withholding two annual increments for two years with cumulative effect, and awarded 25% backwages from the date of dismissal until reinstatement.

Whether the Labour Court was correct in modifying the punishment of dismissal to withholding of increments? Whether the workman is entitled to full backwages? Whether the employer is entitled to reinstatement of dismissal based on loss of confidence? Whether the misconduct of negligence and insubordination was sufficiently proved?

Employer: The workman, as a security guard, was grossly negligent in not properly checking the truck, resulting in an extra vehicle passing undetected; loss of confidence in the workman rendered reinstatement inappropriate (reliance on L. Michael v. Johnson Pumps Ltd., AIR 1975 SC 661). The Labour Court erred in finding discrimination when none was pleaded; high discipline is required of security guards, and insubordination towards superiors further justified dismissal. Workman: The actual checking procedure at the main gate did not involve full physical counting of vehicles, as pre-certification by loading area staff was relied upon; stopping and fully unloading trucks would cause inordinate delay. The punishment of dismissal was disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.

19. The above study of the chain of rulings brings out the futility of the contention that subsequent to Murugan Mills' case [Murugan Mills v. Industrial Tribunal, AIR 1965 SC 1496 : (1965) 2 SCR 148 : (1965) 1 Lab LJ 422] colourable exercise of power has lost validity and loss of confidence has gained ground. The law is simply this: The Tribunal has the power and, indeed, the duty to X-ray the order and discover its true nature, if the object and effect, if the attendant circumstances and the ulterior purpose be to dismiss the employee because he is an evil to be eliminated. But if the management, to cover up the inability to establish by an enquiry, illegitimately but ingeniously passes an innocent-looking order of termination simpliciter, such action is bad and is liable to be set aside. Loss of confidence is no new armour for the management; otherwise security of tenure, ensured by the new industrial jurisprudence and authenticated by a catena of cases of this Court, can be subverted by this neo-formula. Loss of confidence in the law will be the consequence of the Loss of Confidence doctrine. 10.1. The vehicles are loaded in the warehouse where there is also a security guard stationed. The number of vehicles, which are loaded is supervised by the Supervisor and certified by the Supervisor and cross-checked by the security guards and certified. The trucks transporting two-wheelers have two compartments. One at the lower deck and another at the upper deck. Normally, 25 vehicles are placed in the upper deck and 25 vehicles in the lower deck. The upper deck is closed by a tarpaulin and the lower deck has a ceiling of steel or the upper deck has a flooring of steel. The height of both decks is a little more than the height of the vehicle. If the number of vehicles loaded onto the truck has to be manually checked, then the truck would have to be stopped at the main gate, the doors opened, the tarpaulin removed, and the security guard has to enter both compartments to count the vehicles. Insofar as the upper compartment is concerned, removal of the tarpaulin would be sufficient but insofar as the lower deck is concerned, the vehicles loaded would have to be physically removed at least to some extent to verify the number of vehicles loaded. This is not what was being done by the workman in the last several years since his employment. If that kind of procedure is adopted, then, there would be a huge delay in trucks passing through the main gate, and there would be a pileup of trucks going out of the factory.

Workman joined service as Security Guard on 22.04.1999. On 14.08.2006, a complaint was filed alleging failure to salute a superior. On 16.08.2006, an incident occurred where a truck passed carrying an extra unaccounted vehicle. A show cause notice was issued on 25.08.2006 for negligence, and another on 11.09.2006 for misconduct/insubordination. Workman replied on 15.09.2006. A joint domestic enquiry was conducted, and the Enquiry Officer's report dated 05.03.2007 held all charges proved. A second show cause notice proposing dismissal was issued on 16.06.2007, to which the workman replied on 23.06.2007. The Disciplinary Authority imposed dismissal. Workman challenged the punishment before the Labour Court, Mysore, in IID No.121/2007. The Labour Court, by award dated 05.03.2014, set aside the dismissal and imposed withholding of two annual increments for two years with cumulative effect and 25% backwages. Both parties filed writ petitions in the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in 2014. The matters were heard together, reserved for orders on 03.02.2023, and the order was pronounced on 05.04.2023.

• Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: 11A
• Constitution of India: 226, 227