Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Rajendra Singh Bhambhu (Dece) vs C M R S R T C And Anr on 8 January, 2013

Bench: Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi

    

 
 
 

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JAIPUR BENCH

D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.2181/2011
In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4988/2010
Rajendra Singh Bhambhu
Versus 
Chief Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Sardar Shahar & Anr.
Date of Order     ::     08.01.2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI


Mr. Govind Gupta on behalf of
Mr. M.F. Beg, for appellant.
Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, for respondents.

*** This intra-court appeal has been filed by the workman assailing order of learned Single Judge dt.24.08.2011.

The deceased employee while in service was served with charge sheet for disciplinary action against him and after holding enquiry he was afforded show cause notice and finally punished with the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dt.18.06.2003 but it appears that there was some industrial dispute pending before the Tribunal, for this reason application was filed by the management (RSRTC) seeking approval U/s 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. The learned Tribunal observed that disciplinary enquiry was unfair and accordingly declined to grant approval as prayed for by the management. However, the writ petition came to be preferred by the respondent-RSRTC and taking note of the material which came on record it was observed by the learned Single Judge that the premise on which a finding was recorded regarding enquiry being unfair based on non supply of charge sheet & documents and non supply of complete enquiry record was unsustainable as the delinquent appeared and participated in the disciplinary enquiry and after copy of the enquiry report was furnished, written explanation was called for and only after opportunity of hearing was afforded he was held guilty and punished with the penalty of dismissal from service and accordingly held that the disciplinary enquiry was fair and let the matter may proceed further and adjudication may be made to the application filed by the respondent under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act of 1947.

Counsel for appellant has tried to convince this Court that the finding which has been recorded by the learned Single Judge regarding fairness of the disciplinary enquiry requires re-consideration in the instant intra-court appeal.

We have heard the parties at length and also gone through order of the learned Single Judge and material on record but do not find any error in the order which may require interference and the enquiry being held fair sufficient opportunity is available to the parties to address on the application which is now being remitted to the Industrial Tribunal for further consideration on the direction of the learned Single Judge.

We do not find any merit in the appeal, hence the same is dismissed accordingly.

 [BELA M. TRIVEDI], J.      [AJAY RASTOGI], J.


R.Vaishnav
85.

Certificate:All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.

Ramesh Vaishnav Jr.P.A.