Workmen Of Syndicate Bank, Madras vs Government Of India And Anr.
- SCC1986 Supp (1) SCC 483
- AIRAIR 1985 SC 1667
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Even where a management has conducted a proper departmental inquiry complying with required procedure and imposed punishment after proving charges of misconduct, the government cannot refuse to refer an industrial dispute to the Industrial Tribunal on the sole ground that such procedure was followed. The existence of a duly constituted inquiry and procedurally correct imposition of penalty does not preclude adjudication of the dispute, as such a ground would deprive workers of the opportunity to challenge findings that may be unreasonable, perverse, actuated by mala fides, or where the penalty is wholly disproportionate to the offence. A refusal to refer based on this ground alone is invalid and must be set aside.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. We are of the view that the ground on which the Govt. of India has refused to refer the dispute relating to the imposition of punishment of stoppage of three increments on Shri. Murugavelu to the Industrial Tribunal is not a valid ground. It would not be right for the Govt. of India to refuse to make the reference on the ground that the charges of misconduct against the worker were proved during a duly constituted departmental inquiry and penalty was imposed on the worker after following the required procedure. If such a ground were permissible it would be the easiest thing for the management to avoid a reference to adjudication and to deprive the worker of the opportunity of having the dispute referred for adjudication even if the Order holding the charges of misconduct proved was unreasonable or perverse or was actuated by mala fides or even if the penalty imposed on the worker was totally disproportionate to the offence said to have been proved. The management has simply to show that it has held a proper inquiry after complying with the requisite procedure and that would be enough to defeat the worker's claim for adjudication. Such a situation cannot be countenanced by law. We must, therefore, set aside the Order dated 2-4-1981 passed by the Govt. of India declining to make a reference of the industrial dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. We would direct the Govt. of India to reconsider the question of making reference of the industrial dispute for adjudication without taking into account the aforesaid irrelevant ground which seems to have prevailed with them in declining to make the Reference. If the Government of India yet declines to make a reference and the ground on which such reference is declined is improper or irrelevant, it would be open to the appellants to make an application to the Court under this appeal and for this purpose, we give liberty to the appellants to apply. The Government of India will give its decision on the question whether the industrial dispute should be referred or not within 45 days from today.
2. The appeal is accordingly disposed of but with no Order as to costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free