1 W.P.No.1101.10 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1101 OF 2010 Calmon Abacus Textiles Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner v/s Vilas K. Rathod ... Respondent Mr.V.P.Vaidya for the petitioner. Mr.Ravindran Nair for the respondent. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 P.C.: 1. The petition has arisen from an order passed by the Labour Court holding that the enquiry is not fair and proper and that the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse. The Labour Court has so held on the ground that the enquiry was conducted against the respondent in Chennai and not at Thane. The respondent’s allegation against the complainant was that the complainant had remained absent from work after he was transferred from Thane to Chennai. However, in his complaint, the complainant had not raised any 2 W.P.No.1101.10 grievance about the enquiry being held in Chennai. His principal contention was that no enquiry was held and that even assuming the enquiry had been conducted, it was vitiated as the principles of natural justice had been violated. 2. In my opinion, the Labour Court has erred in observing that since the enquiry was conducted in Chennai and not at Thane, the enquiry was not fair and proper. However, un-disputedly, the enquiry proceedings have not been proved before the Labour Court by examining the enquiry officer. Therefore, the findings of the Labour Court that the enquiry must be set aside are correct. When the enquiry itself has not been proved before the Labour Court, the question of going into the perversity of the findings of the Enquiry Officer would not arise. 3. In my opinion, when the petitioner has not proved the enquiry proceedings before the Labour Court by examining the enquiry officer, it must be considered that the petitioner has conducted no enquiry. The petitioner will have an opportunity to prove the misconduct before the Labour Court. In my opinion, there is no need to interfere with the order of the Labour Court or the Industrial Court. 5. Writ petition rejected. ..... 3 W.P.No.1101.10 4 W.P.No.1101.10