CWP 5289/2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH SB Civil Writ Petition No.5289/2010 Managing Director, Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation. Vs. Shyam Manohar Chaturvedi & anr. DATE OF ORDER : 17/08/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. RP Garg, for petitioner. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the award passed by the learned Labour Court, Kota dt.01/02/2010 whereby the respondent-workman has been reinstated with continuity of service without any back wages and at the same time in exercise of powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, while holding that the charge No.3 of charge sheet dt. 24/11/1980 partly proved, punished the respondent-workman with the penalty of stoppage of one annual grade increment. It has come on record that the respondent- workman initially joined services as LDC on 09/12/1977. However, three different charge- sheets dt. 24/11/1980, 06/06/1981 and 31/08/1981 were served upon him. After holding enquiry, the charges levelled against the respondent-workman in respect of all the three charge sheets, referred to above, were found proved by the enquiry officer and taking note thereof the CWP 5289/2010 [2] respondent-workman was removed from service. Upon industrial dispute being raised by the respondent-workman, the matter was referred by the appropriate Government to the learned Labour Court, Kota for adjudication. The matter was initially heard in regard to the fairness of the enquiry proceedings and the learned Labour Court by a detailed order dt. 12/05/2009 finally observed that the domestic enquiry held is unfair and accordingly, the permission was granted to prove the charges before the learned Labour Court. Before the learned Labour Court, the statement of one Mr. Govind Ram was recorded on behalf of the petitioner. He was the departmental witness and taking note of the material on record with respect to all the three charge sheets, the learned Labour Court finally held that the charge No. 3 arising out of charge sheet dt. 24/11/1980 is partically proved but the other charges levelled against the respondent workman in charge sheet dt. 24/11/1980 and at the same time charges levelled in the charge sheets dt. 06/06/1981 and 31/08/1981 were not found to be proved. Taking note thereof, the respondent workman was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service and at the same time, looking to the nature of charge, which was found partly proved, punished the petitioner with the punishment of stoppage of CWP 5289/2010 [3] one annual grade increment in exercise of powers under Section 11-A of the Act vide award dt.01/02/2010. Counsel for petitioner has tried to persuade this Court that the findings which have been recorded by the learned Labour Court in regard to all the three charge sheets referred to supra, are totally perverse and the material on record has not been examined it requires interference by this Court. Counsel further submits that even from the statement which has been read over of their witness Mr. Govind Ram, referred to in Para No. 13 of the award impugned, clearly depicts that all the charges levelled against the respondent- workman were proved being duly supported by evidence on record and in such circumstances, the finding deserves to be set aside. The learned Labour Court, after recording the finding held the domestic enquiry to be unfair as stated in the order impugned dt. 12/05/2009 and granted permission to the petitioner to prove the charges before the learned Labour Court itself with respect to the charges levelled in all the three charge sheets, referred to above and after examining the charge sheets and the charges levelled therein as well as recording the statement of Mr. Govind Ram, the witness examined CWP 5289/2010 [4] on behalf of the petitioner, recorded finding in favour of the respondent-workman and found the charge NO. 3 of Charge Sheet dt. 24/11/1980 as partly proved and the other charges with respect to the charge sheet dt. 24/11/1980, 06/06/1981 and 31/08/1981 were not found to be proved and looking to the nature of the charge, which was found to be partly proved, the learned Labour Court interfered and while passing the order of reinstatement without any back wages modified the penalty by stoppage of one annual grade increment and in doing so the learned Labour Court exercised power u/Sec. 11-A of the Act. The finding recorded is duly supported by the material on record and this Court does not find any manifest error being committed by the learned Labour Court which may call for interference. Consequently, the writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu-5289-CW-2010-final.doc