The High Court of Punjab & Haryana condoned a 33-day delay in filing an industrial dispute appeal. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was guilty of misappropriation and that the service render
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No. 1874 of 2010 Date of Decision: 28.02.2011
Balbir Singh
...Appellant
Versus
The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh and others.
..Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present : Mr. Devinder Kumar Kaushal, Advocate, for the appellant.
RANJAN GOGOI, C.J.(Oral)
CM No. 5610 of 2010
On due consideration of the grounds on which the condonation has been prayed for and upon hearing the learned counsel for the appellant, delay of 33 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. C.M. disposed of.
LPA No. 1874 of 2010
The dismissal of the workman, who was a bank employee, has been upeheld by the Industrial Adjudicator as well as by the learned Single Judge. The contention advanced on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was with regard to certain
LPA No. 1874 of 2010
[2]
defects in the departmental enquiry held. However, specific details of such defects were not mentioned. The same is the position before us.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant used to work under a Supervisor and the Supervisor had not been charge-sheeted. Even if the same is accepted to be correct, the said fact, by itself, cannot exonerate the appellant. Learned counsel has further argued that having regard to the service rendered by the appellant (24 years) a lesser punishment should have been imposed.
We do not agree. The appellant having been found to be guilty of misappropriation no question of any lesser punishment would arise. The appeal, therefore, is without any merits. It is accordingly dismissed.
(RANJAN GOGOI) CHIEF JUSTICE
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE 28.02.2011 'ravinder'
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in filing the industrial dispute appeal should be condoned.
Whether the appellant should be exonerated from punishment due to lack of charge-sheeting of the supervisor.
Balbir Singh
The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh
Ranjan Gogoi
Augustine George Masih
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
