The Management of Modella Woollens Limited vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court and Another

K.P. Bhandari, J.—This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the award dated 9-7-1990, copy Annexure P/4, of the Presiding officer, Labour Court, Union Territory, Chandigarh, whereby the Labour Court has held the termination of the service of the respondent-workman as illegal. The Labour Court has further held that respondent-workman is entitled to reinstatement with effect from 11th August, 1987 with the benefit of continuity of service. However, the Tribunal directed that respondent-workman will only be entitled to 50 per cent of the back wages.

Admittedly the services of the respondent-workman have been terminated by the petitioner management on the ground that the respondent-workman absented from duty. It has been authoratitively held by the Supreme Court in Jai Shanker Vs. State of Rajasthan, that termination of the service on the ground of absence from duty amounts to mis-conduct. If the services have been terminated on the ground of mis-conduct it was incumbent upon the management to serve a chargesheet and hold a regular enquiry against the workman. No such enquiry was held Therefore, plainly the order of termination of service is contrary to the provisions of the Standing order and the principles of natural justice

Learned counsel for the management has not been able to show how the order of the Labour Court suffers from any legal defect. He has not been able to distinguish the judgment of the Supreme Court wherein it is held that termination of service on the ground of absence from duty amounts to mis conduct The only contention of the learned counsel for the management is that the managment has not terminated the services of the respondent-workman but it is a case of abandonment of duty. I am afraid this is not the conrrect factual position. According to the stand in the written statement as well as according to the arguments raised before the Labour Court it is clear that services of the respondent-workman were terminated on the ground of absence from duty. Termination of service on the ground of absence from duty constitutes termination by mis-conduct No termination is permissible on the ground of mis-conduct unless proper enquiry is held according to the principles of natural justice.

Learned counsel for the management has relied upon the judgments reported in National Engineering Industries Ltd. Vs. Hanuman, . The Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd. Vs. The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal and Another, Indian Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. and Another Vs. Their Workmen, and Burn and Co., Ltd. v. Their Employees 1957 (1) L. L. J 226 S. C. in support of his contention. These authorities are clearly distinguishable on the facts of the present case. I am of the opinion that this is not a case of abandonement of duty but is a case of termination of service on the ground of absence from duly. No other point has been urged by the learned counsel for the management.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. The petitioner management is directed to reinstate the respondent-workman with immediate effect and allow fifty per cent of the back wages from the date of termination till the date of award of the Labour Court with twelve per cent interest. After the date of the award of the Tribunal, the respondent-workman will be entitled to full back wages with twelve per cent interest It is clarified that the respondent-workman will be entitled to all the benefits of increment and revision of grades of pay which have taken place in the management. Back Wages be paid to the respondent-workman within one month.