AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jyoti Mulimani, J
Sri.S.Santhosh Narayan., learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Rashmi.M.R., learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 and Smt.Rashmi Patel., learned HCGP for respondent No.5 have appeared in person.
The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ and quash the proceedings pending before the fifth respondent in IDA/SR/13/2023-24 as per Annexure-R.
Learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents have urged several contentions. Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the Writ papers with utmost care.
Sri.Santhosh Narayan., learned counsel for the petitioner in presenting his arguments strenuously urged that the suspension of an employee is not an industrial dispute. He argued by saying that the order of suspension is not punishment. Hence, the initiation of proceedings by the fifth respondent is unsustainable in law. He placed reliance on the decision of this Court in MANAGEMENT OF BOSCH LIMITED VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS reported in MANU/KA/2497/2012 to contend that the order of suspension cannot be questioned by the workman and if the proceedings are allowed to be continued before the Labour and Conciliation Officer, it is as good as intervening in the inquiry process. Hence, he submitted that initiation of proceedings by the fifth respondent may be quashed.
Smt.Rashmi Patel., learned HCGP justified the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt.Rashmi.M.R., learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4 justified the initiation of the proceedings by the fifth respondent.
The oral submission made by the respective parties is placed on record.
Suffice it to note that respondents 1 to 3 are employed by the petitioner at its factory situated at Yeshwanthapur, Bengaluru and they have been subjected to disciplinary inquiry proceedings on account of certain misconduct and the order of suspension is passed by the Management. Hence, they made a representation on 12.08.2023 and the fifth respondent - Labour and Conciliation Officer has taken the representation on record and has registered it as an Industrial Dispute in ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ: ಕಾಅಬೆಂ-4/ಐಡಿಎ/ಎಸ್ಆರ್-13/2023-24. Based on the representation, the fifth respondent has initiated proceedings. This is unsustainable in law. The reason is apparent. The law is well settled that the suspension of an employee is not an industrial dispute and the order of suspension is not a punishment. Furthermore, mere suspension pending inquiry by itself does not constitute an Industrial Dispute. This aspect of the matter has been overlooked by the fifth respondent and is erroneously proceeding further in the matter. Hence, I have no hesitation in holding that initiation of proceedings by fifth respondent is unsustainable in law and it is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, it is quashed.
The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The proceedings pending before the fifth respondent in ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ: ಕಾಅಬೆಂ೪/ಐಡಿಎ/ಎಸ್ಆರ್13/2023-24 vide Annexure-R is quashed.
As a result, the Writ Petition is allowed.