Chief Manager vs Rohitash Kumawat And Ors

Petitioner assails the order dated08/08/2019 whereby application moved under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for seeking approval has been rejected by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Jaipur.

Learned counsel submits that charge-sheets were issued to the workman and the workman had appeared before disciplinary authority and admitted that he was given opportunity by the enquiry officer to defend himself and therefore, the enquiry could not be declared as unfair and unjustified.

After considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court finds that the learned Industrial Tribunal after examining each and every charge-sheet and the enquiry conducted by the concerned enquiry officer has reached to the conclusion that in the first charge-sheet, the enquiry officer completed the enquiry in a single day and did not give any opportunity to defend; in the second charge-sheet, although the workman was not present, however, it was mentioned that charge was read over to the workman and the workman refused to conduct any cross-examination and similarly, in the third charge- sheet also, the workman was not present but a wrong noting was given, as above that the workman was present and refused cross- examination and thereafter the enquiry proceedings were closed and in fourth and fifth charge-sheets also, similarly it was mentioned that the workman was present although he was not present. In view thereof, the learned Tribunal reached to the conclusion that the enquiry was unfair.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any document to prove that the workman was present during enquiry. On the other hand, from the enquiry proceedings, it is also noticed that the concerned enquiry officer has mentioned at a place that the workman was not present. In view thereof, the conclusion drawn by the learned Tribunal does not warrant any interference. Moreso, as the concerned workman has expired, no further enquiry could be conducted.

In view thereof, the order passed by the learned Tribunal disapproving the punishment order and rejecting the application under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947 is perfectly justified and in accordance with law.

The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications stand disposed of.