ONCE
THE LABOUR COURT HAS EXERCISED THE DISCRETION JUDICIALLY, THE HIGH COURT CAN
INTERFERE WITH THE AWARD, ONLY IF IT IS SATISFIED THAT THE AWARD OF THE LABOUR
COURT IS VITIATED BY ANY FUNDAMENTAL FLAWS
The
appellant was served with article of charge alleging that he had secured
appointment by producing a false transfer certificate. The enquiry officer
submitted the report holding the appellant guilty for his misconduct. After
affording opportunity to the appellant to show cause against the proposed
punishment, the disciplinary authority passed the order imposing punishment of
dismissal from service.
The
appellant raised an industrial dispute before the III Additional Labour Court,
Bangalore. The Labour Court directed the management of the corporation to
reinstate the appellant in his original post with continuity of service but
without backwages. In the Labour Court, appellant has produced notarized copies
of orders passed by the respondent-Corporation in respect of other workmen, who
have committed similar misconduct but were awarded lesser punishments.
The
respondent-Corporation filed a writ petition before the High Court. The learned
Single Judge allowed the writ petition holding that the punishment of dismissal
from service was proportionate to the proved misconduct against the appellant.
The
Supreme Court observed that the High Court did not keep in view the parameters
laid down by this Court for exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court under Articles
226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court can interfere with
the award, only if it is satisfied that the award of the Labour Court is
vitiated by any fundamental flaws.
The
Supreme Court held that they do not find that the award passed by the Labour
Court suffers from any such flaws. The appeal was allowed and the order of the
High Court was set aside and the award passed by the Labour Court is restored. [K.V.S.
Ram Vs. B.M.T.C]
Prepared by: S. Hemanth
Advocate at Hemanth & Associates