Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ petition filed by Welcomegroup Searock, a five-star hotel, challenging a revisional order of the Industrial Court at Mumbai. The dispute arose from the termination of an employee, Kashinath Iyer (Respondent No.1), by the management. The management alleged that the employee participated in violent activities during industrial unrest in 1989-1990, including assaults on hotel officials and damage to property. A domestic inquiry was conducted, and the employee was found guilty of misconduct, leading to his termination. The employee filed a complaint of unfair labour practice under the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, which was dismissed by the Labour Court. On revision, the Industrial Court set aside the dismissal and directed reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages, holding that the domestic inquiry was vitiated because the management failed to supply copies of statements of witnesses recorded during the preliminary investigation to the workman, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court, in its judgment, upheld the Industrial Court's order, noting that the employer had not challenged the finding that the inquiry was vitiated. The court directed the employer to allow the workman to resume duties within four weeks, with continuity of service and full back wages, subject to the employer's right to hold a fresh inquiry if desired. The court also clarified that the back wages would be paid from the date of termination until reinstatement, but the workman would not be entitled to wages for the period he was not employed if he had been gainfully employed elsewhere.
Headnote
A) Industrial Law - Unfair Labour Practice - Domestic Inquiry - Non-Supply of Documents - The Industrial Court set aside the Labour Court's order dismissing the complaint of unfair labour practice, holding that the domestic inquiry was vitiated as the employer failed to supply copies of statements of witnesses recorded during the preliminary investigation to the workman, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The court directed reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. (Paras 1-10) B) Industrial Law - Reinstatement - Back Wages - The High Court upheld the Industrial Court's order for reinstatement with full back wages, noting that the workman had been out of service for over 25 years and that the employer had not challenged the finding of the inquiry being vitiated. The court directed the employer to allow the workman to resume duties within four weeks. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Industrial Court was justified in setting aside the Labour Court's dismissal of the complaint and ordering reinstatement with full back wages on the ground that the domestic inquiry was vitiated due to non-supply of documents to the workman.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the Industrial Court's order directing the petitioner to allow the respondent to resume duties with continuity of service and full back wages within four weeks. The employer was given liberty to hold a fresh inquiry if desired.
Law Points
- Unfair labour practice
- domestic inquiry
- non-supply of documents
- violation of principles of natural justice
- reinstatement with back wages
- Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act
- 1971
