Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to two Special Civil Applications arising from the same Labour Court award. The employee, Mukesh Bavanjibhai Parghi, was a driver with the Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation. He was terminated for consuming liquor while on duty on the route from Jhalod to Jasdan. A criminal case was filed against him, but he was acquitted. Despite the acquittal, the employer terminated his services without holding a departmental inquiry. The employee challenged the termination before the Labour Court in Reference (LCR) Case No. 49/2018, which was dismissed. The employee then filed Special Civil Application No. 5796 of 2020 seeking quashing of the Labour Court award and reinstatement with back wages. The employer also filed Special Civil Application No. 9351 of 2020 challenging the same award, presumably on other grounds. The High Court heard both petitions together. The court noted that the employee was terminated for misconduct of consuming liquor while on duty, which is a serious offense for a driver. The Labour Court had dismissed the reference, finding the termination justified. The High Court upheld the Labour Court's decision, holding that the acquittal in the criminal case does not automatically entitle the employee to reinstatement, as the standard of proof in criminal and disciplinary proceedings is different. The court also held that the punishment of termination was proportionate given the nature of the job and safety concerns. The petitions were dismissed, and the Labour Court award was upheld.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination - Disciplinary Proceedings - Acquittal in Criminal Case - The employee, a driver, was terminated for consuming liquor while on duty. He was acquitted in the criminal case. The Labour Court dismissed his reference. The High Court held that the acquittal does not automatically entitle the employee to reinstatement as the standard of proof in criminal and disciplinary proceedings is different. The employer's action was based on misconduct and the Labour Court's finding that the termination was justified was not perverse. (Paras 3-6) B) Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 11A - Proportionality of Punishment - The High Court held that the punishment of termination for consuming liquor while on duty as a driver is proportionate, considering the nature of the job and safety of passengers. The Labour Court's refusal to interfere with the punishment was upheld. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Labour Court was justified in dismissing the reference of the employee who was terminated for consuming liquor while on duty, despite his acquittal in criminal proceedings, and whether the punishment of termination was proportionate.
Final Decision
Both Special Civil Applications are dismissed. The Labour Court award dated 22.11.2019 in Reference (LCR) Case No. 49/2018 is upheld.
Law Points
- Termination without departmental inquiry
- Acquittal in criminal case does not automatically entitle reinstatement
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947 Section 11A
- Proportionality of punishment
