Shri Bans Raj vs Sir Ganga Ram Hospital
2009 Latest Caselaw 3990 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                       W.P.(C.) No. 12036/2009

%                 Date of Decision: 05th October, 2009

# SHRI BANS RAJ
                                                            ..... PETITIONER
!                 Through:    Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate

                                  VERSUS

$ SIR GANGA RAM HOSPITAL
                                                           .....RESPONDENT

^                 Through:    Nemo.

CORAM:
Hon'ble MR. JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL

1. Whether reporters of Local paper may be allowed to see the judgment? NO

2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NO

S.N.AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)

The petitioner in this writ petition seeks to challenge an industrial

award dated 22.03.2006 in I.D. No. 256/1990 by which his dismissal from

the service of the respondent has been found to be legal and justified.

Heard on admission.

Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner, contends that the impugned award is bad because, according

to him, the Inquiry Officer was biased and also because the petitioner had

been acquitted in the criminal case relating to the same incident of theft

for which he was charged. The petitioner was accused of committing

theft of 3 blades, one iron and 2 cups of the fan and also a personal file of

an ex-employee Sh. Pratap Chand while working in the respondent

hospital during the night intervening 11.03.1988 and 12.03.1988. The

inquiry was held against the petitioner in which he was found guilty. In

fact, the petitioner had admitted his guilt in the course of fact finding

inquiry held against him. He was, therefore, removed from the service of

the respondent w.e.f. 19.07.1989.

The Industrial Adjudicator vide its order dated 18.03.2006 has

found that the inquiry held against the petitioner was in conformity with

the principles of natural justice and, therefore, vide impugned award

dated 22.03.2006 has held that the punishment of dismissal of the

petitioner from service of the respondent w.e.f. 19.07.1989 was legal and

justified.

The fact that the petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case

is not a ground to exonerate him of charge of theft proved in the inquiry

held against him. The acquittal of the petitioner in a criminal case cannot

be a ground to reinstate him in service. The allegation of bias against the

Inquiry Officer made by the petitioner, is also without any substance.

The only reason of bias against the Inquiry Officer alleged by the

petitioner is that the Inquiry Officer had appeared for the management of

the respondent in some cases before the Labour Court or in the inquiry

proceedings. Merely on this allegation, it cannot be said that the Inquiry

Officer was biased against the petitioner because the petitioner in the

course of the proceedings before the Industrial Adjudicator could not

bring any other material on record to show bias against the Inquiry

Officer.

In view of the above and having regard to the facts of the case, I do

not find any perversity or illegality in the impugned award that may call

for an interference by this court in exercise of its extraordinary

discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. This

writ petition, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed in limine.

OCTOBER 05, 2009                                       S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'BSR'