The Management Madura Coats Private Limited v. K.Sankaranarayanan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.12.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER and W.M.P.(MD) No.28521 of 2025 1.The Management, Madura Coats Private Limited, Papanasam Mills Post, Tirunelveli - 627 413.
2.Industrial Relation Manager / Professional Relation Manager Madura Coats Private Limited, 35, New Jail Road, Madurai.
3.The Director of Human Resource, Madura Coat India Private Limited, Head Office, 144, M.G.Road, Bangalore, Karnataka State.
... Petitioners Vs.
K.Sakaranarayanan ... Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the Labour Court, Madurai pertaining to the award dated 16.09.2025 in I.D.No.78 of 2022 and quash the same as illegal.
Page No. 1 of 5
For Petitioners : Mr.T.Ravichandran ****
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the Labour Court, Madurai pertaining to the award dated 16.09.2025 in I.D.No.78 of 2022 and quash the same as illegal.
2. The respondent herein, who is a workman employed in Madura Coats Private Limited, approached the Labour Court by filing I.D. No.78 of 2022, questioning his dismissal by the management/petitioners after the conduct of a domestic enquiry. The Labour Court, by the impugned order dated 16.09.2025, held that the management has to justify its action by producing fresh evidence, as the domestic enquiry conducted by the management was not fair and proper and was vitiated by violation of the principles of natural justice. However, it declined to grant any relief to the respondent. At the same time, it directed the management to produce fresh evidence to justify its action.
Page No. 2 of 5
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners/management submits that once the Labour Court found that the domestic enquiry conducted by the management was not fair and proper and was vitiated by violation of the principles of natural justice, it erred in directing the management to adduce fresh evidence to justify its action.
4. The Labour Court had distinguished between the power to conduct enquiry and the manner in which the enquiry was conducted. The Labour Court found that the enquiry was conducted by the management; however, the said enquiry was not fair and proper. For that reason, the Labour Court held that it was incumbent upon the management to adduce evidence to establish that the domestic enquiry was conducted in a fair and proper manner.
5. I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Labour Court. An opportunity is given to the management to produce evidence to show that the enquiry was conducted in a fair and proper manner.
Page No. 3 of 5
6. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. [K.SURENDER, J.] 16.12.2025 JEN Index : Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order To The Judge, Labour Court, Madurai.
Page No. 4 of 5
K.SURENDER , J.
JEN 16.12.2025 Page No. 5 of 5