Gujarat High Court
Ahmedabad Municipal Transport ... vs Dashrathbhai Balubhal Brahmaksh ... on 1 March, 1995
Equivalent citations: (1996)1GLR793, (1996)IILLJ544GUJ
JUDGMENT Rajesh Balia, J.
1. Having heard the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, 1 dispose of the petition finally.
2. The workman-respondent in the main Special Civil Application was dismissed from service on 8-4-1985 bn the ground of wilful absence from duty without leave in pursuance to the charge-sheet served on 13-12-1984. The Labour Court found that holding of the enquiry was not valid. It also came to the conclusion that the absence was due to an accident which resulted in multiple fracture of the workman's bones and therefore, in these circumstances he having a resonable cause for absence the penalty of dismissal was disproportionate to pena misconduct proved, and not justified. It was, therefore, substituted with the penalty of stoppage of one grade increment. The respondent was denied backwages to the extent of 50%. The petitioner challenges the award on two-fold grounds; Firstly, when there was no challenge to the validity of the enquiry held by the management the Labour Court was not justified in coming to a conclusion contrary to it; in view of the past record of the habitual unauthorised absence there was no justification in interfering with the penalty imposed.
3. Having carefully considered, I am of the opinion that no ground for interference has been made out.
4. it is true that there was no challenge to the validity of the enquiry held against the workman, and the Labour Court was not right in going into the question of validity of the enquiry. However, as the Labour Court itself has come to the conclusion about the fact that the workman has remained unauthorisedly absent it has not occasioned in any failure of justice or has not affected the rights of the parties adversely.
5. So far as the question of the penalty being disproportionate to the misconduct, I am of the opinion that notwithstanding the past record of similar misconduct, once the Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was justifiable cause for the unauthorised absence for which charge-sheet served and penalty was imposed, the past record of unauthorised absence would lose much of its significance and therefore, it cannot be said that the discretion exercised by the Labour Court was unjustified or uncalled for.
6. Accordingly, there is no force in the petition. The Special Civil Application is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Interim relief stands vacated. No order as to costs.