The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking certain reliefs. The Court observed that nothing prevented the respondent from submitting the medical certificates, and obtaining leave or seeking sanction of the leave.
Brief Facts:
The respondent was appointed as a Driver and he was brought on probation. He remained absent unauthorizedly from duty without intimation from 20.03.2012. A report was submitted by the Depot Manager with regard to his unauthorized absence. Articles of charge came to be issued alleging unauthorized absence from 20.03.2012. The respondent did not submit his reply to the Articles of charge. He was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and the Enquiry Officer submitted his findings holding that the charges are proved as the respondent admitted the charges leveled against him. He was issued with a second show cause notice along with the findings of the inquiry officer. The respondent submitted his reply to the said show cause notice. The disciplinary authority accepted the findings of the inquiry officer, imposing a major punishment, and dismissing the respondent from service on 26.11.2014. The respondent challenged the order of dismissal before the Labour Court. The Labour Court held the domestic inquiry as fair and proper. On 26.09.2017, the Labour Court held that the order of dismissal was not justified and directed reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service by reducing two annual increments while consequential benefits and back wages were denied to him. It is this award that is called into question in the present Writ Petition.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the contention of the workman is that he was unwell and hence he was unable to attend the office. The Labour Court placed reliance on the medical certificates and erroneously concluded that the order of punishment was disproportionate to the misconduct and hence chose to set aside the order of punishment. Further, the Court remarked, as per leave rules of the Corporation, an employee in the event of requiring a leave on health grounds, is required to submit an application along with medical certificates.
The Court observed that the respondent did not choose to produce the medical certificates or leave application or respond to the call letter or Articles of charge. Nothing prevented the respondent from submitting the medical certificates, and obtaining leave or seeking sanction of the leave. On the contrary, his absence was without seeking leave, hence it is established as unauthorized. The Labour Court has overlooked this aspect of the matter.
Further, the Court said that the respondent remained silent for one year and produced documents while reporting to duty which cannot be accepted as an explanation for unauthorized absence. An employee cannot be expected to be so casual in his approach towards his duty.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court, allowing the petition, held that the interference by the Labour Court with the order of dismissal was erroneous and unjust.
Case Title: Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation vs Ravindranath
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Jyoti Mulimani
Case no.: WRIT PETITION NO. 50435 OF 2018 (L-KSRTC)
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. H. R. Renuka
Advocate for the Respondents: Not mentioned
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
