IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A.No.1181 of 2010 Date of Decision:- 01.03.2011 Rama Kant ....Petitioner(s) vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.J.N.Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. *** Ranjan Gogoi, CJ. (Oral) The appellant-writ petitioner was found guilty on the charge of being absent without leave for a period of nearly one month. He was dismissed from service. On an industrial dispute being raised, the Labour Court answered the reference against the appellant-writ petitioner (workman). By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge while affirming the findings of the domestic enquiry holding the charge to be proved, has invoked the powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act') and directed that the punishment of removal be imposed instead of the punishment of dismissal and terminal benefits, as may be due, be paid to the appellant. Aggrieved, this appeal has been filed by the workman. So long as the charge levelled against the petitioner i.e. absence without leave remains on record, further reduction of the punishment by us in exercise of powers under Section 11-A of the Act will not be justified. L.P.A.No.1181 of 2010 -2- To hold that an industrial employee who has been found to be guilty of absence without leave is liable to be visited with a minor penalty, is a course of action that must not be adopted by the Court as the same may have the potential of bringing in industrial indiscipline. Appeal, therefore, is not being entertained. Dismissed. No costs. ( RANJAN GOGOI ) CHIEF JUSTICE March 01, 2011 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE