C.W.P. No. 11366 of 1988 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 11366 of 1988 Date of decision: 19.11.2010 Labh Singh ..............Petitioner Versus The Cooperative Agricultural Service Society Ltd. and another ................Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI Present: None RANJAN GOGOI,J.(oral) The challenge in the writ petition is against the award dated 13.1.1988 passed by the Labour Court, Patiala in reference case No. 517 of 1982. By the aforesaid award the learned Labour Court has answered the question referred to it in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the management and against the workman. Aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the said award. At the outset the question referred to for adjudication by the Labour Court may be set out herein below:- “Whether termination of services of Shri Labh Singh, workman, is justified and in order? If not, to what relief/exact amount of compensation is he entitled?” Admittedly no domestic inquiry was held in respect of the two charges levelled against the workman i.e. unauthorized absence from duty and embezzlement of the funds of the society. However, the management led evidence before the learned Labour Court on both the issues . Evidence of the management on the point of unauthorized absence was not challenged C.W.P. No. 11366 of 1988 2 by the workman in cross-examination. Insofar as the allegation of embezzlement is concerned an industrial arbitrator was appointed to go into the question and by the awards of the arbitrator i.e. Ex.M-4 and M-5 two amounts of Rs.1100/- and Rs.800/- found to have been embezzled by the workman. No challenge to the awards of the arbitrator was made by the workman. Neither the amounts found to have been embezzled had been repaid. In the aforesaid facts the learned Labour Court took the view that the termination of the services of the petitioner was justified. The power of the writ court while examining an award of the industrial adjudicator does not extend to an appreciation or reappreciation of the evidence on record. Jurisdictional issues and findings which are opposed to the weight of the materials on the record alone can be scrutinized by the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the present case none of the situations which would justify the exercise of power under Article 226 can be said to exist. Consequently, the writ petition is found to be without any merit or substance. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs. (RANJAN GOGOI) JUDGE November 19, 2010 RSK NOTE : Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes/No