The Supreme Court has recently ruled that an acquittal in Criminal Trial in Court has no bearing on Disciplinary Proceedings initiated by the department.
The Bench comprising of Justices M R Shah and BV Nagarathna observed while dealing with a plea of MSRTC challenging Labour Tribunal's order to reinstate a driver whose services were terminated by it after holding a disciplinary enquiry.
"As per the cardinal principle of law an acquittal in a criminal trial has no bearing or relevance on the disciplinary proceedings as the standard of proof in both the cases are different and the proceedings operate in different fields and with different objectives."
Brief Facts of the Case
The respondent-employee was dismissed from service after Disciplinary proceedings initiated against him as the bus he drove met with an accident with a jeep which resulted in death of four passengers on the spot.
On this basis, the Court stated that respondent-employee was 'negligent' in conclusion.
From the judgment and order passed by the criminal court it appears that the criminal court acquitted the respondent based on the hostility of the witnesses; the evidence led by the interested witnesses; lacuna in examination of the investigating officer; panch for the spot panchnama of the incident, etc.On the contrary in the departmental proceedings the misconduct of driving the vehicle rashly and negligently which caused accident and due to which four persons died has been established and proved, the Court noted.
The Court concluded that Industrial Court has erred in giving much stress on the acquittal of the respondent by the criminal court.
disciplinary authority holding charge and misconduct proved in the departmental enquiry, and has interfered with the punishment of dismissal solely on the ground that same is shockingly disproportionate"
As far as the reinstatement order is concerned, the Court noted that the Industrial Tribunal can order that only in a case where it is found that dismissal of an employee is for misconduct of a minor or technical character, without having any regard to the nature of the particular misconduct or the past record of service of the employee, so as to amount to a shockingly disproportionate punishment.
After examining the details, the Court observed that it cannot be said that the order of dismissal was without having any regard to the past record of the service of the respondent. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Industrial Court wrongly invoked clause No.1(g) of ScheduleIV of the MRTU & PULP Act, 1971.
"in the facts and circumstance of the case, the Industrial Court committed a grave error and has exceeded in its jurisdiction while interfering with the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority, which was not interfered by the Labour Court."
Accordingly, the Court uphled the order of dismissal passed by the disciplinary authority and qusahed the Industrial Tribunal and High Court orders, interferring in the same.
Read Judgement Here:
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments