Ramesh Kumar vs M/S Fruit And Vegetable Project
2010 Latest Caselaw 4827 Del

                                                                 UNREPORTABLE


*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                 W.P. (C) No.6972/2010


                                            Date of Decision: October 19, 2010


       RAMESH KUMAR                                ..... Petitioner
                             through Mr. Raman Kapur, Advocate with
                             Mr. Honey Taneja, Advocate

                        versus


       M/S FRUIT AND VEGETABLE PROJECT                   .... Respondent
                       through None

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA

1.     Whether the reporters of local papers 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

REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL)

It is not disputed by the petitioner that he absented from duty

without sanctioned leave. It is also not disputed that before

disciplinary action was taken against him, six charge-sheets were

given to him regarding his absence from duty without intimation. In

view of absenteeism of the petitioner at regular intervals, domesting

enquiry was conducted against him resulting in his dismissal from

service. He challenged the order of his dismissal before the Presiding

Officer, Labour Court but to no avail. The Labour Court vide its order

dated July 12, 2010 has upheld the order of dismissal.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the order

of the Labour Court on the sole ground that the punishment of

dismissal is disproportionate to the charge of absenteeism against him.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner absented himself

from duty not once, not twice but as many as six times and that too

without giving prior intimation to the respondent and without getting

the leave sanctioned, I do not find the order of dismissal

disproportionate to the charge of absenteeism.

There is no merit in the petition. The same is dismissed.

REKHA SHARMA, J.

OCTOBER 19, 2010 ka