Writ Appeal No. 2282 of 2007. Case: Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs V.N. Srinivasa Reddy S/o Venkateshappa and Ors.. Karnataka High Court

Case Number:Writ Appeal No. 2282 of 2007
Party Name:Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs V.N. Srinivasa Reddy S/o Venkateshappa and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: C.M. Desai, Adv. for Aravind C. Desai, Adv. and For Respondents: Narayanaswamy, Adv. for M.C. Narasimhan and Associates
Judges:P.D. Dinakaran, C.J. and Mohan M. Shantana Goudar, J.
Issue:Industrial Disputes Act; Constitution of India - Article 162
Citation:2009 (5) KarLJ 634, 2009 (1) KCCR 604
Judgement Date:September 25, 2008
Court:Karnataka High Court
 
FREE EXCERPT

Judgment:

P.D. Dinakaran, C.J.

  1. The appellant-company is a Government of India Undertaking.

  2. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant, the appellant-company had advertised for certain vacancies in the category of general workmen at Bangalore, L. P.G. Plant. The respondents were among the 24 candidates selected and appointed after taking required bond/undertaking from them.

    2.2 As per the corporation's policy the information produced by the respondents was reviewed and the documents were forwarded to the concerned school/ colleges for verification regarding proof of age, qualification etc. The school authorities have confirmed in writing that the information provided by the respondents was either false or the documents have been fabricated. In certain cases, the schools do not exist in the address given by the respondents. Thereupon, the appellant issued show cause notice to the respondents and the respondents have admitted their mistake in the reply to the show cause notices and prayed for condoning the same. Therefore the appellant implementing the condition of the bond/undertaking terminated the services of the respondents.

    2.3 Aggrieved by the said termination, the respondents raised an industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal in CR. No. 57/1997 and the Industrial Tribunal by award dated 23.06.2004, directed reinstatement of the respondents whose services were terminated as back as on 25.05.1992 with a further direction to pay 25 per cent of backwages from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement with continuity of service. Aggrieved by the said award the appellant approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 34818 of 2004 and the learned Single Judge of this Court after hearing both sides dismissed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the said order of the learned Single Judge, the appellant has preferred this writ appeal.

  3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.

  4. The question that is in issue in this appeal is, whether the appellant could have terminated the services of the respondents herein sans enquiry, solely basing the order of retrenchment on the admission made by the workmen that they had furnished false information at the time of their joining service.

    4.1 The appellant has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of A. Umarani v. Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Ors. reported (2004)IIILLJ780SC. It is a case wherein several appointments were made in contravention of mandatory...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL