Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court acknowledged that the termination of an employee by his or her employer could not be intervened with simply on the basis that there was no disciplinary investigation conducted, if the employer could warrant the lack of conduct before the Labour Court.
In the present case, an Assistant Teacher working at Jai Bharat Junior High School located in Haridwar, was terminated by the Management on the basis of continued absence from work. The Labour Court in reference to the incident, ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to the claim of any relief because there was ample proof asserted by the Management to prove his prolonged absence from the School. The High Court permitted the writ petition submitted against the Labour Court on the basis that no investigation into the matter or disciplinary proceedings had been taken in view of the termination of service by the employee.
On subsequent appeal in the Supreme Court, the three-judge bench consisting of Justice Indu Malhotra, Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Navin Sinha observed that the Labour Court had provided both parties with ample opportunities to present both oral and documentary evidence in favour of their respective cases. Drawing precedence from the case of Workmen of Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd. v. The Management of Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. of India (P) Ltd and Other (1973) 1 SCC 813, the Supreme Court held that if the employer has not conducted any enquiry before the termination or dismissal of an employee, the employer can avail the excuse of the action of not conducting said enquiry or disciplinary investigation, if the same can be justified with by providing evidence before a labour court.
86540
103860
630
114
59824