Case Note & Summary
The writ petitions, clubbed for hearing, arise from the dismissal of the petitioner, an employee of Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL), a Government of India enterprise under the Ministry of Defence. The petitioner, who joined in 1995 as a clerk-cum-typist and was promoted to Accountant in 2010, was actively involved in union activities. In December 2013, several unions of BEL formed a United Action Front and issued a strike notice under Section 22(1)(B) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for a strike on 11.12.2013 to press for charter of demands. On the night of 10.12.2013, the petitioner along with other office bearers and members assembled in the BEWUF estate grievance office, allegedly consuming alcohol and refusing to vacate despite requests, and abused the security officer when the police arrived. A complaint was filed by the Chief Security Officer about unauthorized stay and presence of anti-social elements. On the strike day, 11.12.2013, the petitioner was among those who aggressively obstructed the movement of factory buses and vehicles at Kuvempu Circle, hurled abuses, threatened executives, and forced contract workers out of buses. Another incident at the Officers Club involved office bearers sitting on the road to obstruct vehicles carrying executives. Security reports detailed the petitioner's alleged misconduct. Later, on 08.06.2014, an incident occurred where the petitioner allegedly assaulted a security supervisor, Uthappa B.K., leading the Enquiry Officer to prematurely close the domestic enquiry, citing inability to produce witnesses due to intimidation. Consequently, the Chairman and Managing Director passed an order on 17.06.2014 under Section 15A of the Certified Standing Orders, dismissing the petitioner. The General Manager on 18.06.2014 also issued a final order dismissing the petitioner and tendering one month's wage, while informing of an application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act for approval of the dismissal, as industrial dispute was pending. The employer accordingly filed such approval application before the CGIT. Meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application under Section 2A(2) and (3) of the Act seeking adjudication of his individual dispute. The CGIT, by order dated 13.03.2015 in FR No.26/2014, held that the application was premature because the approval application under Section 33(2)(b) was still pending, and ordered return of papers. The petitioner challenged both the dismissal orders and the CGIT's order in these writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The High Court heard the matters and reserved orders on 12.04.2019, but the provided judgment text does not contain the final operative part or reasoning. The Court's decision on the validity of the dismissal, the compliance with natural justice, and the correctness of the CGIT's order remains unknown from the extract.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dismissal orders dated 17.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 passed by the respondents are legal and valid? Whether the CGIT was justified in returning the workman's application under Section 2A(2) and (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as premature due to the pending approval application under Section 33(2)(b)?
Law Points
- Validity of dismissal under Certified Standing Orders Section 15A
- Compliance with Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act
- 1947
- Maintainability of application under Section 2A(2) and (3) while approval application is pending
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (10) 20
WRIT PETITION NOS.55121-55122/2015 (L-TER) c/w WRIT PETITION NOS.18832/2015 (L-TER)
SRI M VEERABHADRAIAH for petitioner; SRI ISMAIL M.MUSBA for respondents 1 to 4 and 6; SRI P D VISHWANATH for respondent in WP 18832/2015
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Challenge to dismissal orders passed by employer under Certified Standing Orders and Industrial Disputes Act, and challenge to interlocutory order of CGIT returning workman's application for adjudication.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of order dated 17.06.2014 (Annexure-A) and final order dated 18.06.2014 dismissing the petitioner; and quashing of CGIT order dated 13.03.2015 in FR No.26/2014 returning the application under Section 2A(2) and (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was dismissed from service following alleged misconduct during a strike and an incident of assault on a security supervisor; the domestic enquiry was prematurely closed; employer sought approval under Section 33(2)(b); when petitioner filed his own application for adjudication, CGIT returned it as premature.
Previous Decisions
Employer dismissed petitioner by order dated 17.06.2014 under Section 15A of Certified Standing Orders and final order dated 18.06.2014 under Section 33(2)(b) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; employer then filed approval application before CGIT; CGIT by order dated 13.03.2015 held that the workman's application under Section 2A was premature and returned papers.
Issues
Whether the dismissal orders dated 17.06.2014 and 18.06.2014 passed by the respondents are legal and valid?
Whether the CGIT was justified in returning the workman's application under Section 2A(2) and (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as premature due to the pending approval application under Section 33(2)(b)?
Judgment Excerpts
the Chairman invoking the authority vested in him under Section 15A of the Certified Standing Orders of the Bangalore Complex, was pleased to dispense with the ongoing enquiry and was further pleased to order dismissal of the petitioner with immediate effect
the enquiry came to be prematurely closed by the enquiry officer on the premise that it is not conducive to continue the enquiry as the Presenting Officer had submitted that he is unable to produce the Management Witnesses in view of the incident dated 08.06.2014
the CGIT & LC was pleased to uphold the office objections raised on the maintainability of the application preferred by the workman under sub-sections (2) & (3) of Section 2A of the Act
Procedural History
The employer dismissed the workman on 17.06.2014 under Section 15A of Certified Standing Orders and by final order dated 18.06.2014 under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The employer filed an approval application under Section 33(2)(b) before the CGIT, which was pending. Meanwhile, the workman filed an application under Section 2A(2) and (3) before the same CGIT, which by order dated 13.03.2015 held it to be premature and returned papers. The workman filed the present writ petitions challenging both the dismissal orders and the CGIT's order. The High Court by order dated 09.03.2016 directed both writ petitions (55121-55122/2015 and 18832/2015) to be listed together for consideration. The petitions were heard together and reserved for orders on 12.04.2019. Judgment pronounced on 11.10.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: Section 22(1)(B), Section 33(2)(b), Section 2A(2), Section 2A(3)
- Certified Standing Orders of Bharat Electronics Limited, Bangalore Complex: Section 15A
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
