1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3128/2008 Karni Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. Date of Order :: 21.5.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. J.S. Bhati, for the petitioner. ... By this petition for writ a challenge is given to the award dated 12.4.2005 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jaipur. In brief facts of the case are that the appropriate government referred an industrial dispute for its adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court in the terms, “Whether the action of the Northern Railway, Bikaner in removing from the services of Shri Karni Singh w.e.f. 12.3.1999 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and from which date?” The labour court by its order dated 4.10.2004 decided the preliminary issue that is relating to fairness of the inquiry against the employer. Accordingly, an opportunity was given to produce the evidence to justify the charge levelled against the workman, as per the provisions of Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Accordingly, evidence was adduced by the employer as well as by the workman. On analytical examination of the material available on record the labour court reached at the conclusion that the workman remained absent unauthorizedly from 24.4.1997. The labour court also considered the adequacy of the penalty imposed that is of removal from service and found the same proportionate to the delinquency. The reference, then, was answered in negative by upholding the removal of the workman from service w.e.f. 12.3.1999. 2 While assailing validity of the award aforesaid the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no adequate opportunity was given to the workman during the domestic inquiry as a notice for initiating inquiry was sent to his permanent address through the workman was residing at Bikaner. I do not find any substance in the argument advanced as the labour court by the order dated 4.10.2004 held the inquiry unfair and allowed the parties to adduce the evidence. Error or irregularity in the domestic inquiry therefore is of no consequence. No error is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner with the inquiry conducted before the labour court, as such, the order impugned does not suffer from any error that may warrant interference of this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR), J. Jgoyal