CWP No. 16570 of 1990 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 16570 of 1990 Date of decision: 28.01.2010 The Manimajra Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Ltd. ...... PETITIONER VERSUS The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Chandigarh and another ....... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. R.C.Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.R.Rana, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present writ petition is for setting aside of the award Annexure P-9 published on 14.11.1990 passed by the Labour Court, Chandigarh. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the findings, as recorded by the Labour Courft, cannot be sustained as this was a case of confession of the mis-conduct on the part of the workman. In the light of CWP No. 16570 of 1990 2 the acceptance of the mis-conduct and that too in writing by the workman and on consideration of the reply submitted by the workman, the society proceeded to terminate the services of the workman. He contends that in the light of the confession made by the workman with regard to his having sold 295 bags of cement and pocketed the amount along with one Sh. Balbir Singh, Salesman and later on deposited the amount, which they had mis-appropriated, leaves no manner of doubt about the mis-conduct of the workman. The Management, on the basis of these facts and admission of the workman, proceeded to terminate the services of the workman. Once the guilt having been admitted, there was no need for holding a departmental enquiry against the workman. He, on this basis, submits that the findings given by the Labour Court cannot be sustained as it is not legally sustainable. On the other hand, counsel for respondent No. 2 contends that the confession was obtained from the workman by coercion and it was not a voluntarily one. He contends that when the confession is not given out of free will, the same cannot be relied upon and acted upon. The award passed by the Labour Court that the petitioner Management should have held an enquiry against the workman despite there being a confession on the part of the workman is fully justified in the given facts and circumstances and, therefore, the award deserves to be upheld. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. It is not the case of respondent No. 2-workman that he is an illiterate person. It is also an admitted fact that the workman had put his signatures on the confession statement. The workman was a Salesman and was dealing with the cash and, therefore, was well conversant with the CWP No. 16570 of 1990 3 dealings and the contents of the document, on which the signatures were put by him. Had it been a mere confession and that too, under coercion by the workman, he should not have proceeded to deposit the amount, which was alleged to have been misappropriated by him along with one Sh. Balbir Singh, Salesman. The petitioner having acted upon the confession statement dated 30.09.1985, which has been placed on record as Annexure P-1, it cannot be said that the said document or the confession was taken from the workman by coercion or without any free will. Having admitted the guilt and the misappropriation of the amount for selling 295 bags of cement and pocketing the same for their own use, the Management was not required to hold an enquiry as there was no denial on the part of the workman. The enquiry is held only to find out the truth. The mis-conduct having been admitted, there was no dispute, which required to be enquired into. In such circumstances and on consideration of such confession made by the workman which has been found to be a voluntary one, decision taken by the Management cannot be said to be not in accordance with law. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned award Annexure P-9 published on 14.11.1990 passed by the Labour Court, Chandigarh, is hereby set aside. ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE January 28, 2010 pj