The Allahabad High Court held that the Labour Court has been given ample power under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to examine the correctness of the finding returned by the Inquiry Officer in passing the discharge or dismissal order.
Brief Facts:
The Labour Court, upon receiving a reference under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act regarding the validity of the termination order, framed a preliminary issue regarding the procedure adopted by the employer during the enquiry. The Presiding Officer of the Labour Court upheld the validity of the departmental enquiry procedure conducted by the employer, which led to the termination of the Petitioner's service. The petitioner filed the present petition under Article 226, challenging this order.
Contentions of the Applicant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that owing to the order dated 17.01.2024 his right to assail the reasoning/finding returned by the Inquiry Officer to reach a final conclusion resulted in the termination of the present petitioner has been curtailed/negated, whereas, petitioner has got right to assail the same before labour tribunal/ court. Further in support of his submissions, he placed the provisions as enunciated under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and speculated that after the order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the learned labour Court only the quantum of punishment has to be seen and nothing remains to be decided qua finding returned by the Inquiry Officer during departmental enquiry.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent opposed the submissions as advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and contended that there is nothing on the record to demonstrate the right of the petitioner to assail the finding/reasoning returned by the Inquiry Officer during the departmental enquiry has been curtailed. It is further contended that the matter is still before the labour court to challenge the termination order and the same can more appropriately be decided by the labour court after appraisal of evidence to be adduced by the parties.
Observations of the court:
The court stated that in the final paragraph of the order, the Labour Court unequivocally stated that the Petitioner was given ample opportunity to present evidence and defend themselves during the departmental enquiry and further all necessary documents were provided to the Petitioner during this process, and the procedures adhered to the principles of natural justice.
The court further referred to the provisions of Section 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act, which empowers the Labour Courts, Tribunals, and National Tribunals to provide appropriate relief in cases of workman discharge or dismissal. Within this framework, Section 11-A of the Act grants these bodies the authority to assess whether a discharge or dismissal order was justified. The court stated that the language of Section 11-A does not restrict the workman's right to challenge the reasoning or findings of the Inquiry Officer in the departmental enquiry.
Further, the court held that the phrase "is satisfied that the order of discharge or dismissal was not justified" in Section 11-A explicitly indicates the Labour Tribunal's authority to scrutinize the correctness of the Inquiry Officer's findings leading to the termination.
The decision of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Charan Pal Singh vs Presiding Officer Labour Court Second Up Ghaziabad And Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Pathak
Case No.: WRIT - C No. - 11990 of 2024
Advocate for the Petitioner: Jamal Ahmad Khan
Advocate for the Respondent: C.S.C
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
