IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 23592 of 1998 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.23592 of 1998 ORDER: The order of the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad in I.D.No.67 of 1997 dated 5.8.1998 upholding the validity of the domestic enquiry is put in issue by the petitioner –workman. Sri V.Srinivas, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit, not without justification, that even in the absence of the enquiry report, and the documents marked in the enquiry, being placed before it, the Labour Court had upheld the validity of the departmental enquiry. A perusal of the impugned order would show that, in the appendix of evidence, no witnesses were examined. Even among the list of documents Ex.W.1 is the report of the Vigilance Officer dated 13.3.1996 whereas no documents were marked on behalf of the respondent – employer. Sri V.Srinivas, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that Ex.W.1, marked on behalf of the petitioner – workman, is the report of the Vigilance Officer, which is not the enquiry report but an investigation conducted prior to commencement of the disciplinary enquiry. The Labour Court, in its order dated 5.8.1998, acknowledges that it did not receive the entire file relating to the enquiry. It defies reason as to how the Labour Court could have concluded that the enquiry held was in accordance with principles of natural justice when the entire record was itself not placed before it. The order of the Labour court, upholding the validity of the domestic enquiry, must, therefore, be set aside and the matter remanded back to the Labour Court to decide the question of the validity of domestic enquiry afresh after the entire record is placed before it. Since the matter has been pending for more than a decade it is but appropriate that the Labour Court decides the question with regards the validity of the domestic enquiry at the earliest, in any event, not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. No order as to costs. __________ 28-2- 2008 asp