Ram Rattan v. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala & ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CWP-10989-2017 (O&M) Date of decision :04.12.2023 RAM RATTAN
...Petitioner
Versus
THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, AMBALA AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :
Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. A.S. Virk, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
HARSH BUNGER, J. (ORAL) 1.
Petitioner-Ram Rattan has filed the instant writ petition under Articles
!
" #$%&'
( )( !(* $ $ + )( ,&- ( '
(
. - (
(
/ * '
* ' .
0 *
)( ( *
''
( *
)( '
.
'
$
( *
1 '
* 0
.
'
2 3
&
4 *'
/ * * ( . 5.
'
(
(*- .
** **
.
, * *
'
' '* 6 , . '
#
* 0 (
.
.
(
'' - * .
.
(
.* '.
7
$8 $9 $4 *5 '
! :6
+ :6!,& $ * '
(
'
2 3
& ( .
** *
'
$ *'
* * '
! '
* ''
$( * * *
)( !(*'
! :
!
" #$6& * '
(
'
;# ( * ( '
$ ! :
!
" #$6& (
( '
'
' ( ( . '
, *( * ''* . ''
'
* . ''* ( ( ** . (
! :
!
" #$6& *
)( !(*
<' *
)( . '
!
!
" #$%&
. '
$ ( *
* (
. - (
( ( .
'*
)
* '
( *
)( ( * * .
'
.
(
.* '.
:6 !- * '
* .
(
(
( *
)( ( * ! * '
(*
'
' '
!
!
" #$%&'
( *
)( ( *(
* ( % # *
*''
'
2
'' ' ( * '
( ( *
)( '
**$
0 !
**
( '
* * *( ( .* '.
:6!-
*
(
( '
* *
'*
- * *
)(
0 (
'
! * '
* '
(
:
.
*
*
'
.
'
'
''
$( (*
10.
Contours of the scope of interference by High Court in disciplinary proceedings are well settled. In Union of India v. P. Gunasekaran, 2015(1) S.C.T. 5, Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- "13. Despite the well-settled position, it is painfully disturbing to note that the High Court has acted as an appellate authority in the disciplinary proceedings, re-appreciating even the evidence before the enquiry officer. The finding on Charge No. I was accepted by the disciplinary authority and was also endorsed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
In disciplinary proceedings, the High Court is not and cannot act as a second court of first appeal. The High Court, in exercise of its powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, shall not venture into re-appreciation of the evidence. The High Court can only see whether : a) the enquiry is held by a competent authority; b) the enquiry is held according to the procedure prescribed in that behalf;
c) there is violation of the principles of natural justice in conducting the proceedings;
d) the authorities have disabled themselves from reaching a fair conclusion by some considerations extraneous to the evidence and merits of the case; e) the authorities have allowed themselves to be influenced by irrelevant or extraneous considerations;
f) the conclusion, on the very face of it, is so wholly arbitrary and capricious that no reasonable person could ever have arrived at such conclusion;
g) the disciplinary authority had erroneously failed to admit the admissible and material evidence; h) the disciplinary authority had erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence which influenced the finding;
i) the finding of fact is based on no evidence. Under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the High Court shall not:
(i) re-appreciate the evidence;
(ii) interfere with the conclusions in the enquiry, in case the same has been conducted in accordance with law;
(iii) go into the adequacy of the evidence;
(iv) go into the reliability of the evidence; (v) interfere, if there be some legal evidence on which findings can be based.
(vi) correct the error of fact however grave it may appear to be;
(vii) go into the proportionality of punishment unless it shocks its conscience.
xxx xxx xxx
18. The disciplinary authority, on scanning the inquiry report and having accepted it, after discussing the available and admissible evidence on the charge, and the Central Administrative Tribunal having endorsed the view of the disciplinary authority, it was not at all open to the High Court to re-appreciate the evidence in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
19. Equally, it was not open to the High Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, to go into the proportionality of punishment so long as the punishment does not shock the conscience of the court..."
! " # #$ % &'
(# ) ##'* +,- )"
. 4 =(* 7' * >
!
"
# $ !
! )
# '
/#0 !
1# / ,)-* ,- )" 2 , - )
4
#' 05'( ! 60 ) *
,- )" 7 , - ) 7 8 )
/#((5# #%# ! 80'
# 0'*
2,- )" ..
, 2- ) .719 )' (
0 ! 9
#5 :
#* ., - )" .7 , .-
) #% "#(%# #%# ! ;
;$(* 7,- )" .7 , 7- ) 2 1&# ) !
#' )
# 66# #$
/#0 :
#* 7,- )" .7 , 7- )
.- % 4606 )6#5( ! 9# 16#
0 '%$ !0'' , 0- :
<#(* ,-
)" .2 , - )
% ! #
& ' ( )
* + ' ,- ".
/ ( 0 1 2),-
(
1 2 ) ,- "
"3 1 2 ) ! 1 2 )4 ( 1 2) ,- $ 1 2),- ! $# "3 $
/ $ ,-
( $ $ ".&56 78
?
' . $ * * ' * ( '' .
( '
$ '
'
$3
>$
!
- !9 :; : - !<# < =:; )$> 1? ) @A
A )
>@ ! $ 5
5& = 1 ? )1+ ! ; !
"
! A # %
!"
5& 55.5
5* 55. )1+ ! ( %5 ! ) &B
A &
! # <) <CB 5 ! DE = $?) DF ) $ *
!
! G ?
H
! ) &B &2 &(
A
$ 1 5* 55. / ?> ) @ . ,DD) ) +C- @ ( ? .* =99 @ + :,(- : 8
! '
*
'
*
( )( *
.
( '
$
'* ** '* ' .
** *
'* '.
.
* .
** '* * * 1 '* *
* '.
'*
* '*
** '* * . '
* * (
*(
'*
1
'
'
$@@
* ( )(
$ '* ** '* ' .
)( 0 **(
. * * ' (.
'
*
** '
!
!
" #$%& '
( *
)( @
* *
'
* '
*
!**'
''* *** * December 04, 2023 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether reportable:
Yes/No