The Bombay High Court while dealing with departmental enquiry and subsequent award held that where a serious act is involved it is all the more necessary to have the highest standard of proof for considering the evidence placed on record.
Brief Facts:
The present writ has been filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (employer) against the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. the award was filed against the Respondent No.1, however, he expired hence, his legal heirs were impleaded.
The original Respondent No.1 also field a writ challenging the award to the extent it held that the departmental enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer was fair and proper.
Brief Background:
Original Respondent No.1 was employed in Grade-7 capacity with the Petitioner Corporation and had joined the services of the Petitioner as a General Operative.
It was alleged that original Respondent No.1 was found indulging in an unnatural sexual act with a dog on the first floor of terrace of the Refinery Learning Centre Building.
A Departmental enquiry was initiated. The Disciplinary Authority dismissed original Respondent No.1 from the services of the Petitioner Corporation. An appeal was preferred which was dismissed.
The Central Government Industrial Tribunal held that the enquiry was fair and proper, however the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse. Hence, the present matter.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
It was argued that the order of the Tribunal was non-speaking. Further, it was argued that enough evidence both documentary and eye-testimony were there to hold Respondent No.1 guilty.
Contentions of the Respondent:
It was argued that the proceedings were in English language and hence, unfair as Respondent No.1 didn’t know English. It was contended that standard of proof in a departmental enquiry cannot be merely limited to the preponderance of probabilities.
Observations of the Court:
It was noted that the enquiry held was fair and proper. The Bench opined that since the charges were extremely serious in nature, nothing prevented the Petitioner from lodging a criminal complaint.
As per the evidences, it was seen that in the present case, there was no such strong evidence to prove the offence of Respondent No.1. The Court held that where a serious act is involved it is all the more necessary to have the highest standard of proof for considering the evidence placed on record.
The decision of the Court:
Based on the aforementioned reasons, the High Court accordingly upheld the award.
Case Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. XYZ
Case No.: WRIT PETITION NO. 1715 OF 2013
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Milind N. Jadhav
Advocates for Petitioner: Advs. Mr. Anand Pai, Mr. Rahul Sanghvi, Mr. Sanjay Udesh
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Mr. Jaiprakash Sawant
Read More @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
