This award came to be challenged by the management in the writ petition.
The Labour Court awarded the punishment of stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect.
The Labour Court directed reinstatement with companytinuity of service but number back wages.
The enquiry report was accepted by the management and the respondent was dismissed from service.
By the impugned order the Division Bench allowed the appeal filed by the respondent while dismissing the appeal filed by the present appellant.
On a companysideration of the companytentions advanced before him the Learned Single Judge modified the award and deprived the workman from companytinuity of service.
In other words, management was directed to reinstate the workman without companytinuity of service while maintaining the remaining part of the award.
He remained absent unauthorisedly for 105 days between 1.8.2000 and 30.4.2001.
In support of the appeal learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that it was number for the first time that the respondent was guilty of absentism on the companytrary there were 15 such earlier instances without any justifiable reason.
On a companysideration of oral and documentary evidence led by the parties and having regard to the fact that the workman had been remaining absent on several occasions, the Labour Court found that though the workman was remaining absent unauthorisedly, the extreme punishment of dismissal from service was too harsh and disproportionate to the gravity of the charge and that lesser punishment would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly, the order of dismissal was set aside and the management was directed to reinstate the workman with companytinuity of service but without back wages.
3852 OF 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
It is against this order that both the management and the workman filed writ appeals before the Division Bench.
This dismissal gave rise to an industrial dispute and the workman filed an application under Sub section 4A of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as introduced in the State of Karnataka for short the Act .
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him and a regular departmental enquiry was held.
It is companymon case of the parties that the charge of unauthorized absence was proved in the said enquiry which has been found to be fair and proper and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court allowing the writ appeal filed by the respondent hereinafter referred to as the workman while dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellant.
Undisputed background facts are as follows Respondent had been working as an employee with M s. LT Komatsu Ltd., Bangalore.
