C.W.P. No.3977 of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.3977 of 2001 Date of Decision: 29.10.2009 Haryana Dairy Development Corporation Federation .....Petitioner Versus The Presiding Officer, Industry Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Panipat and another ....Respondents Present: Mr. H.S. Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Johan Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Varinder Punia, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The order of the Labour Court finding that the enquiry had not been fair and proper is challenged at the instance of the management. The grounds set out in the order of the disciplinary authority were in respect of some misconduct attributed to the workman. There had been an initiation of a criminal proceeding through registration of FIR. The impugned order of Labour Court records the fact that as per the enquiry report, apart from the workman, three other persons had also been held guilty but the order of dismissal had been made only against the workman and C.W.P. No.3977 of 2001 -2- the management had played “double standard” in taking action only against the workman. The merits of these contentions themselves were not examined by the learned Judge but he stayed confined to the reasoning that since departmental enquiry and criminal proceedings on the same facts could not be proceeded simultaneously, the conduct of domestic enquiry was not fair and proper. This reasoning of the learned Judge conflicts with the well settled proposition of law enunciated through a wealth of precedents that domestic enquiry and criminal proceedings operate in two different fields and even the standard of proof which in the former shall be preponderance of probabilities while in the latter, it shall be proof beyond reasonable doubt. There is no impediment for simultaneous proceedings of domestic enquiry and even a criminal prosecution and the ultimate finding recorded by the Labour Court that the enquiry was not fair and proper is not in accordance with law. 2. The order of the Labour Court is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Labour Court for consideration of the finding whether the enquiry was fair and proper on appropriate legal and factual parameters. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. The parties shall appear before the Labour Court on 02.12.2009. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 29, 2009 Pankaj*