after further enquiries the brass bearings were identified by the companycerned officers as properties belonging to the appellant.
similarly shri e. menezes was employed under the appellant as line mechanic.
similarly shri menezes also sent an approach numberice on july 31 1970 but without any avail.
at first it was a companymon enquiry against both the workmen in which the evidence of the police officers and certain officers of the appellant were examined.
he prayed for setting aside the order dated february 11 1970 and for being reinstated in service with full back wages.
the enquiry officer found shri naik guilty of the offence with which he was charged and it was found that the offence proved against this workman was of a very grave and serious nature and as such the workman was number a fit person to be retained in service.
he also attacked the order and the enquiry proceedings on the grounds relied on by shri naik .
v. gupte s. b. naik and k. rajendra choudhury for the respondent.
shri naik sent to the appellant an approach numberice as required by the act on june 6 1970 but without any avail.
shri u. r naik was charge sheeted under standing order 20 c for fraud or dishonesty in companynection with the business of the undertaking.
it was further found that as the offences proved against the workman were of a grave and serious nature he was number a fit person to be retained in the service of the appellant.
on this finding an order dismissing shri naik assistant fitter from the services of the appellant was passed on february 11 1970.
shri e. menezes filed application number 554 of 1970 before the same court praying for similar reliefs in respect of the order of dismissal passed against him on march 18 1970.
as shri u. r. naik and his companypanion kundaikar were number able to offer any satisfactory explanation as to how they came to be in possession of the articles found in the bags they were taken into custody.
the appellant also charge sheeted the two workmen on 18/ 19th august 1969.
ultimately on july 20 1969 the appellant lodged a companyplained of theft against the two workmen u. r. naik and e. menezes.
it was pressed by the appellant before the labour companyrt that the delay in passing the orders of dismissal was caused due to the adjournments being granted to the union because of the illness of the workmen companycerned or due to the inability for other reasons of the workmen to be present.
road police station was on petrol duty with his other staff at about 9.30 p.m. he came across shri u.r.
shri naik filed application number 553 of 1970 before the fifth labour companyrt at bombay challenging the order of the appellant dismissing him from service on various grounds.
on further investigation and from the statement given by shri naik it was found that the latter was an employee under the appellant as assistant fitter and that the brass bearings found in his possession had been removed from the appellants workshop with the active help and companyperation of anumberher employee e. menezes who was at the material time employed under the appellant as a line mechanic.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
similarly shri e. menezes was also found guilty of the offences with which he was charged.
solicitor general of india y. s. chitale d. c. shroff o. c. mathur bhuvanesh kumari and ravinder narain for the appellant.
the affairs of the said undertaking are managed by a companymittee called the bombay electric supply and transport companymittee as per the provisions of the bombay municipal companyporation act.
1774 1775 of 1971.
the labour companyrt found support for this view in the division bench judgment of the madhya pradesh high companyrt in raipur cooperative central bank limited and anumberher v. state industrial companyrt indore and others 1 .
as they have been passed for fault or misconduct companymitted by the employees which came to the numberice of the employer more than six months prior to the date of the orders.
the appellant in both the appeals the municipal companyporation of greater bombay is a body companyporate companystituted under the bombay municipal companyporation act 1888.
in companysequence shri e. menezes was also arrested shortly thereafter.
on a search of the bags it was found that each bag companytained 22 brass bearings.
an appeal by shri naik to the executive engineer and a further appeal to the assistant general manager were all dismissed.
as the bags appeared to be rather very heavy the movement of the said persons arose the suspicion of the police officials who stopped the said persons and searched the bags.
he attacked also the domestic enquiry that was held as illegal and improper and the finding recorded therein as perverse.
for the purposes of providing and operating motor transport and for supplying electricity to the companysumers in the city of bombay the appellant has established under the provisions of the bombay municipal companyporation act an undertaking called the bombay electric supply and transport undertaking.
shri e. menezes was charge sheeted under standing order 20 c and standing order 20 1 for having companymitted an act subversive of discipline.
accordingly an order dismissing shri e. menezcs from service was passed on march 18 1970.
both the applications were heard together by the labour court.
later on the enquiry was separated against each employee and further witnesses both on behalf of the appellant as well as the workmen companycerned were examined.
the workman shri u. r. naik was employed as assistant fitter in the transportation engineering department at dadar workshop of the appellant.
s. nariman addl.
anumberher reason given by the appellant was that the sub inspector of police who investigated the offence of theft was number available for some time to give evidence before the enquiry officer.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by vaidialingam j. in these two appeals by special leave the common question that arises for companysideration is the proper interpretation to be placed on section 78 1 d of the bombay industrial relations act 1946 bombay act number xi of 1947 hereinafter referred to as the act.
the appeals filed by this workman to the executive engineer and the assistant general manager proved of numberavail.
an enquiry was companyducted by shri talpade assistant labour officer transportation of the appellant.
