IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 426 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20216/2003 Dated 08/01/2009 .................... APPELLANT: -------------- M.THARANATHAN NAIR PRASANTHAM, MUNDELA PO, VELLANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST, ACCOUNTANT, MUNDELA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO, 2433, MUNDELA PO,VELLANAD. BY MR.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE MR.ANIL K.NAIR MR.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE MUNDELA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD NO. 2433,MUNDELA PO, VELLANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. BY MR.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2009 ALONGWITH W.A.475/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY, Ag.C.J & V.GIRI, J. ------------------------------- W.A.NOS.426 & 475 OF 2009 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,Ag.CJ. Appellant in W.A.No.426/2009 is the 1st respondent in W.A.No.475/2009. While the appellant was working as an Accountant in the Bank, he was suspended pending enquiry for various charges. The charges levelled against him is that his work as a Recovery Officer was not proper and he refused to do the work allotted to him. In fact dereliction of duty was the charge against him. There was no allegation of misappropriation. Misconducts were proved in a properly conducted domestic enquiry. He was compulsorily retired from service. Issue regarding his compulsory retirement was referred to the Labour Court. Labour Court found that misconducts were proved and enquiry was conducted fairly and properly. But however, Labour Court also analysed the evidence adduced before it and found that the punishment W.A.NOS.426 & 475 OF 2009 2 imposed was harsh. According to the Labour Court, there was political differences between the management of the Society and the workman and such political difference is the main reason for imposing such a heavy punishment for misconducts and dereliction of duty. Punishment of compulsory retirement was set aside but he was not reinstated as an Accountant. He was only reinstated as junior most senior clerk and he was not given any backwages or increment in the period he was out of service. He was compulsorily retired on 31.10.1993. Award of the Labour court was on 29.11.2002. On the basis of the award, he will lose nine years full backwages as well as his promotional benefits. Following is the operative portion of the Labour court award: 1. The Punishment of compulsory retirement of the workman from service is set aside. 2. The management is directed to reinstate the workman in service in the rank of the junior most senior clerk. 3. The workman will not be entitled to any backwages or increments during the period in which he was kept out of service. W.A.NOS.426 & 475 OF 2009 3 4. The workman will be deemed to have been in continuous service without any break for the purpose of computing his retirement benefits. Under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, in the case of dismissal or discharge of duties, Labour court has got power to interfere with the punishment and make appropriate relief if the punishment is shockingly disproportionate. The Labour court has considered the matter and found that for misconducts, compulsory retirement or termination of service is highly excessive. At the same time, it is also noted that he has got political connections and he was a social worker. Taking all these relevant circumstances and nature of gravity of misconducts, the relief was granted. The Labour court has got power to reinstate the appellant with backwages. The power exercised by the Labour court is within its jurisdiction. In the absence of any jurisdictional error or patent error apparent on the face of the record, the learned Singe Judge upheld the award rejecting the attack made by the management as well as the workmen. On going through the award, we fully agree with the learned Single Judge that the W.A.NOS.426 & 475 OF 2009 4 Labour Court has exercised jurisdiction correctly. No grounds are made out to interfere in the impugned judgment. We are not repeating the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge as we fully agree with the views of the learned Single Judge. Hence both writ appeals are dismissed. J.B.KOSHY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE V.GIRI JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 6th November, 2008