IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.5789 of 1996 Date of decision: 22.07.2009 The Samaspur Co-operative Credit and Service Society Limited, Samaspur, Tehsil Ganaur, District Sonepat through its Secretary. …Petitioner. Versus Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Rohtak and others. ….Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE MR .JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr. Hari Om Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ramesh Hooda, Advocate, for the respondents. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ----- K.Kannan, J. 1. The domestic enquiry that resulted in termination of services was upturned and the Labour Court directed reinstatement and continuity of service with full back wages, to the workman, who had been respectively charged with misconduct of embezzlement of public funds and funds of the Society. 2. The award related to two independent references: one, as regards Anup Singh, who while serving as a Salesman since 01.11.1987 had been terminated from his services on 29.09.1990 without assigning any reason or serving any charge-sheet. The defence by the management was that, Anup Singh had embezzled Rs.1584.83 paise by collecting money from members of the public, who were creditors of the Civil Writ Petition No.5789 of 1996 - 2 - Society, by making false entries in the passbooks and retained the money without depositing it with the Society. He was himself a personal defaulter being liable to pay to the Society an amount of Rs.21,820/-. 3. As regards the claim against Rajpal, who incidentally was the brother of Anup Singh, he had been appointed as Chowkidar on 26.05.1979 and he had aligned himself with Anup Singh by collecting money from the members of the public by making false entries in the passbooks. He was also a defaulter of the Society to the extent of Rs.18,236/-. He had also been terminated from service on 29.09.1990 for the misconduct. The defence of the respective workmen was that they could not actually collect money from the public and they could not have also made any entries in the passbooks. None of the persons, whose name was supposed to have been embezzled, had ever made a complaint and gave statement in the enquiry. The Labour Court found that neither Anup Singh as a Salesman nor Rajpal as a Chowkidar, could have collected any money from the public and the allegations that they had not deposited the sums with the bank, could not be true. The orders of termination of services were, therefore, set aside. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the Society argued that the proceedings before the Labour Court themselves were invalid and the references were bad by virtue of the fact that there were independent remedies available under the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act and the Service Rules and the jurisdiction of the Labour Court was excluded. This objection, in my view, is without merit since it has been laid down by an authoritative pronouncement of a Full Bench of this Civil Writ Petition No.5789 of 1996 - 3 - Court in Ambala Cooperative Bank Limited, Ambala Versus State of Haryana and others-1993(2) SCT 310, that the powers of the Labour Court to adjudicate on industrial disputes would not be excluded in any manner by the provisions of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act. The principle laid down by the Full Bench was also reiterated by a decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in The Bhuna Cooperative Sugar Mill Limited Versus Mohinder Singh and another-2000(3) LSJS 692. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Society further argued that there were seven cases against Anup Singh and Rajpal, of which, award of Rs.4466.63 paise for three cases against Anup Singh and Rs.8700/- against Rajpal had been passed. Apart from the fact that the awards had still remained unexecuted, there were also FIRs registered against them for embezzlement. According to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Society, the management has completely lost confidence in the workman especially after there had been charges against them for embezzlement and remained defaulters in payment of money to the Society and allowed the awards to be passed against them and to remain unsatisfied. Beyond wild allegations of embezzlement and persons remaining as defaulters, the management was not able to place before the Court any tangible evidence that there had been any form of enquiry. The relevant rules provide for power to impose penalties and also prescribe a procedure for conducting an enquiry. Rule 14(2) of Service Rules outline the procedure that includes that no punishment for removal from service could be made without Civil Writ Petition No.5789 of 1996 - 4 - affording to a workman an opportunity to show cause against the petitioner. Even the two witnesses who had been examined on the side of the management namely Shri Rajinder Singh, who was Ex-Secretary of the Society and another witness Rajbir Singh, Secretary, while they gave evidence to the effect that some passbooks contained the signatures of the workmen, were also not prepared to give any testimony about any enquiry as having been conducted. The reference to decisions of Arbitrator where another issue of an adjudication by a person named Ishwar Singh, acting as an Arbitrator, had given decision about some loans obtained from the Society that remained unpaid could have no bearing to the punishment imposed. 6. The non-payment of monies to the Society would have independent ramifications but at least it was not brought to my notice that remaining defaulters themselves constituted misconduct. Surcharge proceedings for recovery of money shall be seen to constitute distinct remedies that could not have no bearing on the validity of an enquiry or an action relating to misconduct and visiting workman with orders of dismissals. The decision of the Labour Court that the orders of dismissal were liable to be set aside is founded on adequate legal basis of a brazen violation of fundamental rules of natural justice of visiting a capital punishment with no enquiry whatever. The order of the Labour Court is confirmed and the writ petition is dismissed as without merits. No costs. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 22.07.2009 sanjeev