Summary
An industrial dispute arose in regard to the dismissal of certain workmen. It was referred for adjudication to the industrial Tribunal. There were three domestic enquiries.
One of them was conducted by officers, who had themselves 653witnessed the alleged misconduct. The enquiries were challenged on the ground that they were held in violation of the principle of natural justice and the procedure adopted in conducting them was not fair. The Industrial Tribunal came to the conclusion that the enquiries were not conducted in accordance with the principle of natural justice.Held (i) that the enquiry conducted by the eye witnesses was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice as the enquiry officers had themselves witnessed the alleged misconduct of the workmen. Domestic enquiries should be conducted by such officers of the employer who are not likely to import their personal knowledge into the enquiry proceedings.(ii) That in domestic enquiries, the employer should firstly lead evidence against the workman charged, give him an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and then the workman should be asked to give an explanation if he so desires in regard to the evidence led against him.(iii) That the rule that a witness should not be disbelieved on the ground of an inconsistency between his statement and that contained in a document unless he is given a chance of explaining that document, cannot be treated as a mere technical rule of evidence. The principle on which that rule is based is one of natural justice.(iv) That the evidence given in an enquiry against one workman cannot be accepted as evidence in an enquiry against another for the reason that the evidence given in the former enquiry was not recorded in the presence of the workman concerned with the second enquiry and lie had no opportunity to test that evidence by cross-examination.See the full content of this document
Extract
Associated Cement Co. Ltd. VS. The Workmen And Anr.
PETITIONER: ASSOCIATED CEMENT CO. LTD.Vs.RESPONDENT: THE WORKMEN AND ANR.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/05/1963BENCH: ACT: Industrial Dispute-Diemissal of workmen - Enquiry conducted by eye witnesses--Property-If violates principle of natural justice-Proper procedure in domestic enquiry-Rule of evidence- Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947). 10 (1)D.JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 636 of 1962.Appeal by special leave from the award dated July 13, 1960, of the Industrial Tribunal, Punjab, Patiala in Reference No.16 of 1957.R J. Kolah, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant.654K. T. Sule, Anand Swaroop and Janardan Sharma, for respondent No. 1.1963. May S. The judgment of the Court was delivered byGAJENDRAGADKAR J. -This appeal arises out of an industrial dispute between the appellant, the Associated Cement Companies Ltd., and the respondents, their workmen. The dispute was in regard to the dismissal of five workmen employed by the appellant at its Bhupendra Cement Works, Surajpur. The said workmen are : (1) Mehnga Ram, Bar Bender, (2...
See the full content of this document