JUDGMENT Anjani Kumar, J.
1. The petitioner M/s. Kisan Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd. have filed this writ petition challenging the award of the labour court dated 31.10.1998, whereby the labour court held that the workmen are entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service and 50% of wages.
2. The State Government in exercise of powers under Section 4K of U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute to the labour court for adjudication :
vfHkfu.kZ; okn la- [email protected] ^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk visu Jfed czt dqekj iq= Jh ?kklhjke] gsYij dh fnukad 9-7-1987 ls lsok;sa lekIr fd;k tkuk mfpr [email protected] oS/kkfud gS \ ;fn ugha] rks lacaf/kr Jfed D;k [email protected]"k fjyhQ ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS] rFkk vU; fdl fooj.k lfgr \** A vfHkfu.kZ; okn la- [email protected] ^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk vius Jfed ubZe [kk iq= Jh fnus [kk] pijklh dh fnukad 9-7-1987 ls lsok;sa lekIr fd;k tkuk mfpr [email protected] oS/kkfud gS \ ;fn ugha] rks lacaf/kr Jfed D;k [email protected]"k fjyhQ ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS] rFkk vU; fdl fooj.k lfgr\** A vfHkfu.kZ; okn la- [email protected] ^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk vius Jfed cStukFk oekZ iq= Jh ghjk yky] etnwj dh fnukad 9-7-1987 ls lsok;sa lekIr fd;k tkuk mfpr [email protected] oS/kkfud gS\ ;fn ugh] rks lacaf/kr Jfed D;k [email protected]"k fjyhQ ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS] rFkk vU; fdl fooj.k lfgr \** A
3. The case set-up by the workmen before the Industrial Tribunal was that their services have been terminated without holding proper and fair domestic enquiry and the so-called enquiry that has been purported to be conducted, was not fair and proper. Employers denied these allegations. On the pleadings of the parties, the Industrial Tribunal framed five Issues. After going through the evidence on record adduced by the parties, the Tribunal came to the conclusion and recorded the finding on Issue Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in favour of the workmen and came to the conclusion that the enquiry conducted by the employers was not fair and proper. With regard to Issue Nos. 4 and 5 the Tribunal has recorded that since the issue Nos. 1, 2 and 3 have already been decided in favour of the workmen to the effect that the termination of services of the workmen were illegal, therefore, the workmen were entitled for reinstatement. The Tribunal further held that since the workmen were engaged either in one or other place after termination of their services, therefore, they are entitled for only 50% wages. It is these findings, which are challenged by the petitioner before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner assailed these findings on the ground that the findings are perverse, inasmuch as, in his opinion, the findings arrived at by the Tribunal on the question of unfair domestic enquiry, finds no support from the evidence. Similarly, learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that it has not been denied by the workmen concerned regarding the gravity of the charges levelled against them. The only finding recorded by the Tribunal is that nobody has stated before the Tribunal that what has been alleged against these workmen was found to be true, cannot be said to be suffering from any error of law much less error apparent on the face of record. It is significant to note that the employers have not filed any application before the Tribunal that even if the domestic enquiry was found not to be fair and proper, they should be afforded an opportunity before the Tribunal to prove the charges.
5. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the award cannot be said to be perverse. However, in view of the facts and the charges levelled against the workmen, the award, therefore, deserves to be upheld. As the workmen admittedly have been engaged gainfully in one or the other employment as observed by the labour court, whether they would be entitled for back wages, if any, if so, to what extent? Learned counsel for the petitioner made a statement that considering the gravity of the charges, the employers have lost faith in these workmen, therefore, this Court may award compensation in lieu of reinstatement. The employers since have not raised this issue before the labour court, in my opinion, the labour court be directed to decide these two matters afresh after affording opportunity to petitioner as well as concerned workmen.
6. The award, is therefore, upheld except as observed above. The labour court shall decide the quantum of back wages and the plea as raised by counsel for employers as to whether in place of reinstatement, the compensation will meet the ends of justice, if so, to what amount.
7. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is dismissed.
8. In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own cost.