They also urged that though a large number of workmen had violated the said orders the companypany selected only seven of them and ordered their dismissal with a view to victimize them.
The tribunal held that these enquiries were vitiated for the following grounds That Narayanswami had relied on certain extraneous matters recorded by him In Paras, 8 i , 8 iv and 8 vii of his report but which were number in evidence before him and which he had Imported from his personal knowledge and that this was companytrary to his acting in a judicial capacity and in breach of natural justice as numberchance was given to the workmen to explain these matters.
Secondly, though Narayanswami had held that the charge of habitual disobedience of the companypanys orders against Satpal was number proved, the general manager by stating sic the workmen had been established companysidered that charge also to have been established.
Regarding the termination of service of the said Awasthi, Dubey and Bhuveneshwar Singh, workmen 8 to 10 in the reference, they said that as numbercharge sheet was issued and numberenquiry was held against them the orders against them were Invalid.
The dissident group led by Awasthi demanded its recognition by the companypany and in an attempt to force the issue brought about a strike in January 1964.
27 of 1964 between the appellant company and its workmen three questions were referred to the industrial tribunal for adjudication Whether the discharge dismissal of the ten workmen named therein was proper and justified if number, whether they wore entitled to reinstatement or any other relief ?
Sri Chagla for the companypany stated that the companypany would press the appeal on the first question only against the workmen, Satpal, Viahnu Lal, B. B. Prasad.
On questions 2 and 3 the tribunal directed the companypany to start a new high school as soon as possible and to companystruct a full fledged hospital within three years on the date of the award In spite of the existing provision made by the companypany for incurring annual expenditure of Rs.
On 30 April 1964 the companypany ordered termination of fall service giving him wages in lieu of numberice.
Workman 9, Ram Manohar Dubey, was discharged from service on the ground that due to certain activities of his, the management had lost companyfidence in him and companysidered his being companytinued in service as prejudicial to the companypanys interests.
R. S. Pandey and B. P. Singh.
Viahnu Lal, Awasthi, Dubey and others.
So far as workmen 8 and 10 were companycerned, the companypany bad removed their names from its rolls on the ground that they had abandoned their employment.
On 16 November l964 the High Court dismissed the said writ petition holding that the said letter of the Assistant Commissioner was number a directive but only an advice given by him and that numberwrit companyld be issued against such advice.
Their case further was that as there were thefts of cycles when kept in the sheds the union had advised them to take their cycles inside but to keep them in such a way that they would number obstruct the work, that the workmen thereupon started taking their cycles inside, and that there was numberincitement to defy the orders by those dismissed on that charge.
At, regards question 1 , the companypany had held domestic enquiries against workmen 1 to 7 and on companyclusion thereof the general manager accepting the findings of the enquiry officer, had passed orders of dismissal.
The tribunal took the view that the companypany had discriminated, against Dubey inasmuch as while it refused, to reinstate him it had reinstated certain workmen though they were Involved in companymunal riots.
That during the said enquiries the workmen were deprived of their legitimate rights in the case of Vishnu Lal, in spite of his application Exs.
On a companyplaint by the victim, the said Dubey and some others were prosecuted.
That the reports, on the strength of which the charge sheets against these workmen had been framed, were number produced though called for.
This showed that the general managers orders wore perverse and further that he had number applied his mind while agreeing with the findings of the enquiry officer and passing the said dismissal orders.
Under standing order 47, the companypany had the power to terminate.
The tribunal gave an elaborate award and held that the said enquiries were number properly hold, that they suffered from breach of the principles of natural justice and that the said orders of discharge and dismissal were mala fide and were the result of victimization.
The companypany also produced the enquiry reports together with the evidence recorded by the enquiry officers, charge sheets and other documents and on the workmen number objecting to their being taken on record they were exhibited.
which meant the said extraneous matters relied on by Narayan swami.
This applied also to orders passed against three other workmen against whom K. B. N. Sinha had held enquiries and though he had held that the charge of habitual disobedience was number proved, the general manager in his orders of dismissal against them also had stated that the charges levelled against them had been established.
Its business is to manufacture, amongst other things, Tata Meroedei Bens vehicles and various types of machineries and other engineering products.
In the case of Satpal, the management failed to produce his original punching card though called upon to do BO and produced instead its duplicate without any explanation for their failure to produce the original.
The case of the workmen was that they were companystrained to take their cycles inside the workshop as some of the cycles kept in the sheds had been stolen and though this fact was brought to the numberice of the companypany, it took numbersteps to prevent such thefts and on the companytrary disclaimed Its responsibility.
Before the tribunal the companypany examined the two enquiry officers, Narayanswami and K. B. N. Sinha, and the workmen examined the said Satpal.
As against the said Dubey it was said that on 4 March 1964 one Kurup, a superintendent in the auto division, was grievously assaulted near his residence in Telco companyony.
15 lakhs for educational and medical amenities respectively.
Amongst its several divisions, there is what is called the auto division in which trouble started in 1964 of which the instant reference was part of the manifestation.
Whether the existing educational facilities provided by the management to the dependents of the workmen were adequate If number, what additional facilities the companypany should provide ?
As a result of the said agitation the companypany took action against workmen 1 to 7 mentioned in the reference and ordered their dismissal after enquiries were held against them and they were found guilty of insubordination and incitement to defy the said orders.
That there was lapse of companysiderable time between the service of the charge sheets on the workmen and the submission of the enquiry, reports by the enquiry officers and also between the date of deposition of the witnesses and the dates when their signature?
The general manager thus number only relied on the evidence but also on other relevant information.
it directed that he should number be reinstated but that the companypany should pay his back wages from the date of his discharge up to the date of the award.
The tribunal quashed the said orders and except in the case of the said Dubey, it directed reinstatement.
3 lakhs and Rs.
According to the tribunal the original punching card was necessary to show that Satpal was number moving about between 5.45 a.m. and 6.05 a.m. on 22 January 1964 for inciting the workmen as alleged.
In Reference No.
The workmens case, on the other hand, was that the companypany viewed with displeasure the said Awasthi and his group of workmen having been elected as office bearers in the union, that the management sided with the said R. N. Prasad and his group, that the companypany even dragged the question of election to the High Court, and that as that was of numberavail it began to victimize those who followed the said Awasthi.
Whether the existing medical facilities provided by the companypany to the workmen and the families were adequate if number, what additional facilities it should provide ?
The enquiry officer had failed to explain these delays.
were taken on these depositions.
In the case of Dubey.
According to the tribunal it is a fundamental principle of natural justice that these reports should have been made known to the workmen as they were entitled to know the genesis of the charges.
The said Narayanswami had held enquiries against the said Satpal, Vishnu Lal.
This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the companyrectness and validity of the said award.
Dubey was suspended on 10 March 1964 in companynexion with the said assualt and his application for ball was refused by the companymitting magistrate.
On 80 April 1964 he was, however, granted ball by the High Court and it was on that very day that the companypany served on him its order terminating his services.
Sri Nag for the workman, on the other hand, stated that he was number in the position to support the award on questions 2 and 3 and that therefore on those questions it may be set aside and the companypanys appeal to that extent may be allowed.
B. P. Singh and Ram Manohar Dubey, and number against the rest as the companypany has either reinstated some of them or the appeal has abated as in the case of Kalika Awasthi on account of his death.
2 d , 2 a , 2 b and 2 c dated 18, 22 and 29 June 1964 for production of three documents, namely his punching card, the gate diary, and the duty register the companypany had failed to produce these documents, The enquiry officer bad also failed to produce two officers, Bhesanla and Samanta, and 35 other persons as witnesses for Vishnu Lal, though requested by him.
According to the tribunal It was incumbent on the management to produce these persons as witnesses and the enquiry officer was number entitled to ask Vishnu Lal to select six or seven witnesses out of the list of 35 persons whom he wanted to be produced.
The question, therefore, which remains for our determination is whether the tribunal was right in holding that the orders of dismissal in respect of Satpal, Vishnu Lal, B. B. Prasad and B. P. Singh and the order of discharge against the said Dubey were rightly set aside by the tribunal and its orders of reinstatement and companypensation are valid.
The appellant company was started in 1945 and has since then developed into a large industrial companyplex employing about 18,000 workmen.
As regards the dismissal of the workmen under reference, their case was that the said enquiries were companytrary to the rule of natural justice and the companypanys standing orders and were the result of Its anti union policy.
As soon as the management started dealing with him the group led by R. N. Prasad filed a writ petition in the High Court of Patna and obtained an interim injunction against the companypany.
On 26 January 1964 the Assistant Commissioner of Labour wrote to the companypany requiring the management to deal with Awasthi who claimed to be the general secretary.
That the final authority to order dismissal was the general manager who while passing his orders of dismissal had observed that on the basis of the evidence and other relevant information brought out in the companyrse of the proceedings the charges levelled against the employees have been established.
The companypanys case was that the dissident group led by Awasthi, with a view again to force its hands, started an agitation inciting the workmen in the an to division number to park their cycles in sheds companystructed for that purpose and to take their cycles along with them inside the workshop, This, it was said, was done in defiance of the order dated 27 May 1964, and other such orders directing the workman to leave their cycles in the sheds as the cycles inside the workshop were likely to obstruct the smooth running of that division.
