Legal heirs challenged a Labour Court award confirming dismissal of a transport corporation employee for assaulting superiors. The court found the award well reasoned, based on evidence placing the employee on duty, and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P. No.15523 of 2010
K.Natarajan (Deceased) 1. N.Pandiyammal 2. N.Dhanalakshmi 3. N.Mohana, 4. N.Inbarasu ... Petitioners /Vs./
... Respondents
Page 1 of 6
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to
the preliminary order dated 17.04.2003 and the final award dated 12.04.2004 passed by the first respondent in I.D.No.679/1999, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to pay the petitioners back wages and other attendant benefits from the date of dismissal to the date of death, the terminal benefits, PF, Gratuity, Family Pension and other
death benefits and also to provide compassionate appointment, award costs.
For Petitioner ... Mrs.V.Porkodi for Mr.V.Ajay Khose For R1 ... Labour Court For R2 ... Mr.A.Sundaravadanam Standing counsel
ORDER
Heard Mrs.V.Porkodi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.A.Sundaravadanam, the learned Standing Counsel for R2.
Page 2 of 6
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
the Labour Court dated 12.04.2004 made in I.D.No.679/1999.
the charges that he assaulted his superior officers. In the result of the enquiry, charges have been proved and thereafter, the petitioner was imposed with the punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner has raised an Industrial Dispute by stating that the order of dismissal is illegal.
that the petitioner has been given with false charges and the Labour Court has not appreciated the material in a proper prospective.
respondent, submitted that the learned Labour Judge has appreciated the matter in a correct perspective on the basis of the record and there is no need for any interference.
Page 3 of 6
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
fundamentally false. However, the Labour Court has relied on the evidence of the co-worker with whom the petitioner himself has put questions stating that “When they were working”. From the above words used during the cross-examination, the Labour Judge presumed about the presence of the petitioner in the workplace during the relevant point of time and has also given convincing reasons to prove the same. As such the petitioner did not prove before the Court that there was some previous motive against him in order to level false charges against him. After having satisfied on the basis of the materials and appreciating the matter in the right perspective including the quantum of punishment commensurate with the charges, the Labour Court has rightly held that the petitioner did not make out any case to show that the order of dismissal is illegal.
Page 4 of 6
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
25.09.2024
Index: Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation Case: Yes / No bkn
To: The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore.
Page 5 of 6
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
R.N.MANJULA ,J.
bkn
W.P.No.15523 of 2010
25.09.2024
Page 6 of 6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court's award upholding dismissal for assaulting superior officers suffered from factual or legal infirmity warranting interference under Article 226.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Natarajan (Deceased)
N.Pandiyammal
N.Dhanalakshmi
N.Mohana
N.Inbarasu
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore
R.N.Manjula
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
