Dismissed
Ram Lal v. State of Haryana
Punjab & Haryana HCCWP/13697/1998
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
No. 13697 of 1998 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
What the court decided
AI extract
No. 13697 of 1998 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
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.
Civil Writ Petition No. 13697 of 1998
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No. 13697 of 1998 (O&M)
Date of decision : 3.8.2012
Ram Lal
..... Petitioner
vs
State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. H. S. Grewal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Roopak Bansal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. A. S. Chadha and Mr. S. K. Biriwal, Advocates, for respondent no. 3.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The workman has challenged the award of the Labour Court dated 24.9.1997 whereby his termination by the Management on account of violence and assault committed by him on the senior officers and damage to the property of the company, was upheld.
The facts of the case are that on 13.10.1987 the workmanpetitioner along with other workers in a pre-planned manner caused blockade of both the gates, snapped the telephone wires, damaged the doors and windows. They caused serious injuries to the senior officers. Case under Section 307, 325, 148, 149, 351, 506, 120-B, 427 IPC at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, was registered against him and other coworkers. His services were terminated by the management. Reference of dispute to the Labour Court against his termination order was also declined vide award dated 24.9.1997. The same has now been challenged before this court.
The petitioner was convicted by the trial court under Sections 307, 325, 323, 341, 506 read with Section 149 IPC vide judgment dated 12.10.1993. The order of sentence was passed on 18.10.1993. He preferred appeal before this court bearing Criminal Appeal No. 407-SB of 1993 Prem
Civil Writ Petition No. 13697 of 1998
(2)
Singh and others vs State of Haryana. The appeal was disposed of vide judgment dated 1.12.2006, upholding the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 325, 323, 506 read with Section 149 IPC and acquitting him for charge under Section 307 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to argue that with the majority of other accused workers, who were also involved in the incident, the management had settled and paid compensation whereas the petitioner has been isolated.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the management submitted that other workers had settled with the management after the incident had taken place during the pendency of reference before the Labour Court. However, the petitioner thought of contesting the issue. He was convicted by the trial court on 12.10.1993 and his conviction has been upheld by this court vide judgment dated 1.12.2006 except that he was acquitted of the charge under Section 307 IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner along with other workers in a pre-planned manner caused blockade of both the gates, snapped the telephone wires, damaged the doors and windows. They assaulted and injured senior officers of the company. A case under Section 307, 325, 148, 149, 351, 506, 120-B, 427 IPC at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, was registered, in which he was convicted by the trial court. His conviction was upheld by this court under Sections 325, 323, 506 read with Section 149 IPC, though he was acquitted under Section 307 IPC.
Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, no interference is called for in the impugned award of the Labour Court upholding the dismissal of the petitioner. The plea of discrimination also is totally misconceived considering the fact that other workers had settled immediately after the incident with the management even before the award was passed by the Labour Court. It was only to buy piece.
The writ petition stands dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
3.8.2012 vs.
Ram Lal Singh and others
State of Haryana
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court