9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 661X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 'Tribunal') holding that the termination of his service with effect from 11.4.1984 was reasonable and legal. A reference was made by the State Government in exercise of its power under Section 4(K) of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 'U.P. Act') for adjudication by the Tribunal. The reference which was made on 21st June, 1996 was registered as Adjudication Case No. 39 of 1986. After framing issues on the basis of the statement of payment and the written statement filed by the parties, initially the Tribunal held that the enquiry was not fair and proper. However, the employer was granted liberty to adduce evidence to substantiate its stand that the enquiry was fair and proper. On the basis of materials on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant-employer did not proceed further against them but the situation was different so far as the respondent-workman was concerned. It is to be noted that while Chunnu and Vakil accepted the correctness of the charges levelled against them and tendered apology, the respondent- workman continued to contest the charges levelled against him. On appreciation of evidence the Tribunal came to hold that merely because no action was taken against Chunnu and Vakil, the position is not the same so far as the respondent-workman is concerned. The distinctive features, so far as the respondent-workman and the other two namely Chunnu and Vakil are concerned, were highlighted by the Tribunal. Accordingly the Tribunal held that the termination of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was no such regret expressed by the respondent-workman. On the contrary he tried to justify his action and even termed the strike on 2.5.1980 to be legal one. In response, learned counsel for the respondent-workman submitted that the Tribunal had taken a hyper technical view. Even though he had not given undertaking as given by Chunnu and Vakil there was no allegation that he had resorted to any illegal act thereafter. Mere fact that he had tried to justify his action in the proceedings cannot be taken as a distinctive features to make a departure from the benevolence shown to Chunnu and Vakil. On consideration of the rival stand one thing becomes clear that Chunnu and Vakil stood at different footing so far as the respondent-workman is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
