IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 15TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 36149 of 2008(C) -------------------------- ID.73/2006 of INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, IDUKKI .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE GENERAL SECRETARY PEERMADE THOTTAM THOZHILALI UNION (C.I.T.U) REG NO. 226/57, P.R.CENTRE, VANDIPERIYAR P.O. BY ADV. SMT.A.K.PREETHA SRI.M.R.RAJESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,IDUKKI 2. THE MANAGER, HARRISONS MALAYAM LTD, MOONGALAR ESTATE VANDIPERIYAR P.O. ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR FOR R2 SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR FOR R2 SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI FOR R2 SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS FOR R2 SRI.ANIL D. NAIR FOR R2 GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 36149 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 4th February, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext. P1 award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Idukki in I.D.No. 73/2006. The petitioner is the Union in that I.D. The issue referred for adjudication was: “Whether the dismissal of Shri. Jnanamuthu, C.R.No. 5903 and Shri. Velu, C.R.No. 2241 by the management of Harrisons Malayalam Ltd., Moongalar estate is justifiable? If not what are the relief they are entitled to.” Since the dismissal of the workmen was after conducting an enquiry, the Tribunal considered the validity of the enquiry as a preliminary point and found that the enquiry was conducted validly and properly. Thereafter, the Tribunal considered whether the findings are supported by evidence on record. The Tribunal found that also in favour of the management. Since the misconducts proved were serious enough to warrant the punishment imposed by the management, the Tribunal upheld the punishment also and held that the workmen are not entitled to any relief. That award is under challenge before me. 2. The challenge is only on the ground that findings are not supported by evidence. A contention is raised before me to the effect that the Tribunal had not considered the evidence properly as is clear from the award, wherein there is no discussion of the evidence adduced in the enquiry. In the circumstances, I directed the petitioner to produce the copy of the enquiry proceedings . Pursuant thereto, the petitioner has produced a copy of the enquiry file as produced before the Tribunal. I have gone through the entire enquiry proceedings including the evidence adduced. Five witnesses were examined by the management including the victim of the assault by W.P.C. No. 36149/2008. -: 2 :- the workman which was the charge against the workmen. All of them described in graphic detail the entire incident as seen by them. Evidence regarding treatment of the victim in hospital was also produced. The workmen were found guilty on the basis of such cogent evidence of eye witnesses to the entire incident. In spite of rigorous cross examination of the witnesses the evidence of the witnesses could not be shaken. The workmen did not adduce any evidence in defence. It is on the basis of that evidence, the enquiry officer had found the petitioners guilty of the misconducts, which finding was upheld by the Tribunal in the award. As such, I do not find any merit in the contention that the findings are in any way perverse. On the other hand, I am of opinion that there was sufficient positive evidence on record to show that the workmen were guilty of the misconducts alleged against them. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the findings of the Tribunal that the findings of the enquiry officer are supported by evidence on record. 3. The misconducts involve assaulting and injuring a superior officer. That certainly qualifies for the extreme punishment of dismissal from service, which only has been imposed on the workmen. As such, there is no infirmity in the award. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.