The division judge bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari of the supreme court of India in the case of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs Bharat Singh Jhala (Dead) Son of Shri Nathu Singh, through Legal Heirs & Anr. held that once the order of termination was approved by the Industrial Tribunal and the management was permitted to lead the evidence and prove the misconduct before the Court and thereafter on appreciation of evidence the order of termination was approved, thereafter the fresh reference under Section 10 of the I.D. Act challenging the order of termination was not permissible.
BRIEF FACTS
The factual matrix of the case is that the departmental inquiry was issued against the conductor for not issuing the 10 tickets even though he collected the fare for the tickets. Further, he was found guilty of the misconduct and the service was terminated by the petitioner herein. Thereafter, the application for the approval of punishment under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 was submitted before the Industrial Tribunal and the order of termination was approved by the Industrial tribunal. The labor court set aside the order of termination which was further challenged before the single judge bench of the high court and the same was dismissed by the high court.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently contended that the high court has committed a grave error in dismissing the writ petition and confirming the order passed by the labor court. It was further submitted that when the order of termination was approved by the Industrial Tribunal, thereafter it was not open for the workman to again raise the Industrial Dispute that too after a period of 19 years.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent that the Labour Court did not commit any error in considering the validity of the order of termination and thereafter quashing and setting aside the same and ordering 50% back wages. It was also submitted that the workman has died and his widow is 50% back wages only and the same may not be interfered with by this court in the exercise of power under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution. The learned counsel put his reliance upon the judgment titled John D’Souza vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation.
COURT’S OBSERVATION
The hon’ble apex court held that once the order of termination was approved by the Industrial Tribunal and the management was permitted to lead the evidence and prove the misconduct before the Court and thereafter on appreciation of evidence the order of termination was approved, thereafter the fresh reference under Section 10 of the I.D. Act challenging the order of termination was not permissible. It is required to be noted that the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal which as such is a higher forum than the Labour Court had attained finality. Though the aforesaid fact was pointed out before the High Court, the High Court has not at all considered and/or appreciated the same and has confirmed the judgment and award passed by the Labour Court for setting aside the order of termination which as such was approved by the Industrial Tribunal.
CASE NAME- Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Vs Bharat Singh Jhala (Dead) Son of Shri Nathu Singh, through Legal Heirs & Anr
CITATION- CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6942 of 2022
CORUM- Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari
DATE- 30.09.22
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :