High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 03 KAR CK 0326

Sri Linga @ Lingaraju rep. by Sri Linga @ Lingaraju vs The Management of Devon Plantaions and Industries Ltd.

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 11 March 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 8664 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 341 words

A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—The Petitioner/workman was employed by the Respondent/management. Alleging commission of acts of misconduct by the workman, having held a domestic enquiry, based on the enquiry report dated 27.02.2009, the workman was dismissed from service on 7.3.2009.

2.

There is no dispute that after receipt of the enquiry report dated 27.2.2009, show-cause notice with copy of the enquiry report was not issued to the workman i.e., prior to passing of the dismissal order dated 7.3.2009. Thus the action taken by the management vide award dated 2.3.2009 is vitiated and liable to be set aside.

3.

The workman raised a claim u/s 10(4)(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in the Labour Court at Chickmangalore. The Labour Court passed order on 7.9.2009, answering issue No. 1 in the affirmative held that the Domestic Enquiry against the workman is fair and proper. There after wards it has passed the award dated 3.11.2009 rejecting the claim/dispute. Aggrieved, the workman has preferred this writ petition.

4.

Sri. Ravishankar, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent - Management after arguing the matter for some time does not dispute the fact that, after receipt of enquiry report dated 27.2.2009, second show-cause notice was not issued to the workman i.e., prior to the passing of the order dated 7.3.2009. In the circumstances, the finding recorded by the Labour Court on issue No. 1 dated 7.9.2009 is erroneous and illegal. The resultant position is that the award being vitiated calls for interference. Sri Ravi Shankar, submits that the management would prove the misconduct of the workman before the Labour Court itself.

In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the impugned order is quashed. The matter stands remitted to the Labour Court for consideration and disposal in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Labour Court on 28.3.2011 and receive further orders. The Labour Court is directed to expedite the adjudication and decide the claim as early as practicable and within six months from the date of first appearance of the parties. No costs.