Punjab-Haryana High Court
Maruti Suzuki India Ltd vs Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal ... on 16 October, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
LPA No.33 of 2016 (O&M)
LPA No.40 of 2016 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.33 of 2016 (O&M)
Reserved on: 09.09.2024
Date of Order:16.10.2024
Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Gurgaon
.Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Gurgaon
and another
..Respondents
LPA No.40 of 2016 (O&M)
Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Gurgaon
.Appellant
Versus
Ram Pal Singh and another
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. A.S.Chadha, Advocate
for the appellant.
Ms. Abha Rathore, Advocate
for respondent no.2.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, JUDGE
1. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
1.1 With the consent of the learned counsel representing the parties,
two connected intra court appeals filed against the judgment of the learned
Single Judge shall stand disposed of by a common order. LPA No.33 and 44
of 2016 have been filed by the Management.
2. Sh. Ram Pal Singh was ordered to be dismissed by the
Management from service after holding a departmental inquiry on
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
22.12.1997, on the ground that he is habitual in remaining absent and he
produced fake medical certificates to justify his absence. In substance, the
workman remained absent for a period of 38 days. The Labour Court
exercised enabling power under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947, to scale down the punishment of 'dismissal from service' and
substituted the major punishment of dismissal to that of 'stoppage of two
increments with cumulative effect'. In the two writ petitions, one filed by the
Management, whereas the other filed by the workman, the learned Single
Judge on 28.05.2015, modified the award to the extent that the workman
would be notionally entitled to increments from the date of dismissal of
service. If any person junior to the petitioner in the cadre and in service has
been granted promotion etc. in the meanwhile then the workman would also
have right of parity of pay granted retrospectively but computed notionally
so as to bring his pay at par with such junior but without a right to monetary
benefit prior to the date of award by stepping up of pay as were given to the
juniors appointed to service in 1997 or thereabout except as indicated above.
However, the award of reinstatement in service with 25% of the arrears of
back wages was upheld.
2. ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL
REPRESENTING THE PARTIES:-
2.1 The Management's senior counsel while drawing the attention
of the court to two charge sheets issued on 08.07.1996 and 09.08.1996,
submitted that the aforesaid charges were proved in the domestic inquiry
which has been found fair and proper by the Labour Court in the preliminary
award dated 03.12.2009. He submits that while passing the final award, the
Labour Court exceeded its jurisdiction on setting aside the dismissal and
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
ordering reinstatement with 25% of the arrears of back wages. He submits
that the Labour Court does not have jurisdiction to interfere in the penalty
ordered by the Management unless it is perverse, disproportionate and
shocks the conscious of the Court. He submits that the workman was not
only guilty of remaining absent from duty without any sanctioned leave but
also submitted fake medical certificates.
2.2. Per contra, the workman's counsel has submitted that the
workman had 12 years of unblemished service before the alleged incident
which would be proved from the documents Ex.PW1/1 to PW1/6, proving
100% attendance and commendation certificates from 1986-87 to 1995-96.
She further draws the attention of the court to the cash rewards given to the
workman for the punctuality. She submits that the service record of the
workman was not taken into consideration while ordering 'dismissal from
service'.
3. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION:-
3.1 This Bench has considered the submissions of the learned
counsel representing the parties while evaluating and analyzing their
respective submissions.
3.2 It is evident that the workman was falsely implicated in a
criminal case by the Police which was un-connected to his employment as
he was discharged by the Judicial Magistrate on 30.03.1997. The workman
in order to avail his remedies in the criminal case, left the place of work on
31.05.1997. The workman claims that he sent request for sanction of leave
which was not given any response. The workman had gone to his village
where he had fallen sick. The medical certificate was also produced. The
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
second charge sheet was issued to the workman on the charge of producing
fake medical certificates. The Labour Court as well as the learned Single
Judge has found that the workman was not a habitual absentee and his past
service record was excellent but it was not taken into consideration by the
Management while awarding extreme punishment of dismissal.
3.3 Even if it is proved that the workman while being absent was
trying to avail his legal remedy of anticipatory bail, hence was underground.
However, that itself would not be sufficient to hold that the petitioner was
regularly absenting from the work particularly when he was given
certificates of 100% attendance and commendation certificates regularly for
a period of 12 years when he remained in employment. While recognizing
the requirement of the enabling power of the Labour Court/ Industrial
Tribunal to pass appropriate orders, Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes
Act was introduced by the Parliament in the year 1971, through which
sufficient enabling powers were conferred on the Labour Court to give
appropriate relief in case of discharge or dismissal of workman. The charges
proved against the workman were not grave. Before imposing extreme
punishment of dismissal from service, the Management was required to take
into consideration his 12 years passed unblemished service and the
circumstances in which the workman was placed.
3.4 On the other hand, the Management went to the extent of
getting a communication from the doctor that the Medical Certificates are
fake. Subsequently, the Doctor gave in writing that he was pressurized by
the Management to give incorrect certificate. The workman at that time had
133 days of medical leave available to his credit in his leave account. The
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
Management did not sanction the medical leave and rejected the same.
However, the rejection was not communicated to the workman as required
by the standing order.
3.5 The Management's counsel relies upon the judgment passed in
M.L.Singla vs. Punjab National Bank and another, (2018) 18 Supreme
Court Cases 21. This Bench has carefully read the aforesaid judgment. The
court found that the Labour Court committed more than one jurisdictional
error in answering the reference as the Labour Court failed to decide the
validity and legality of domestic inquiry which was required. Hence, the
aforesaid judgment with highest respect is not applicable to the facts of the
present case.
3.6 The Management's counsel further relies upon the judgment
passed in M/s Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd. vs. N.K.Singh,
(2006) 12 SCC 554, in which the Labour Court without indicating reasons as
to why the punishment was disproportionate to the charges proved;
substituted the punishment. Hence, the aforesaid judgment dose not come to
the rescue of the Management. In this case, the Labour Court has considered
all aspects including the fact that the past service record of the workman was
not taken into consideration and while passing the order of punishment and
the finding of the Management that the workman was a habitual absentee
was factually incorrect. The Labour Court reduced the punishment to the
stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect and the workman was
ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service and 25% back wages.
3.7 In these circumstances, the Labour Court and the learned Single
Judge have exercised their discretion. The scope of interference in Letters
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:135130-DB
Patent Appeal is limited. This Bench is exercising power of judicial review
while hearing the intra court appeals. The Court has the power to interfere
in the punishment of dismissal or discharge even after holding that the
domestic inquiry was fair and proper. Such exercise of jurisdiction by the
Labour Court and the learned Single Judge is not proved to be suffering
from any illegality or perversity so as to interfere.
3.8 The learned counsel representing the parties admit that the
workman would have retired on 21.05.2021, on attaining the age of
superannuation. It is the management which challenged the Labour Court's
award dated 20.01.2012, before the High Court. Now at this stage, it is not
considered appropriate to interfere with the judgment passed by the learned
Single Judge.
4. DECISION
4.1 Hence, both the appeals are dismissed.
4.2 All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
(ANIL KSHETARPAL) ( SHEEL NAGU )
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
16th October, 2024
nt
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
6 of 6
