Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Conductor Denied Right to Defense Assistance, Inquiry Officer Failed to Inform of Co-Worker Representation: High Court Reinstate Conductor

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi has dismissed the petition filed by the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) challenging the reinstatement of a conductor, Ram Avtar Sharma, who was previously terminated for misconduct. The court upheld the Labour Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the inquiry conducted by DTC violated principles of natural justice, thus warranting the workman's reinstatement without back wages.

The court underscored significant procedural lapses during the disciplinary inquiry against the conductor. "The enquiry was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice," Justice Chandra Dhari Singh remarked. The conductor was not provided crucial documents, such as the driver's memo and the log book, and was only allowed to inspect passenger statements, which impeded his ability to mount an effective defense​​.

The court noted that the enquiry officer failed to inform the respondent of his right to be assisted by a co-worker. "Such an opportunity is not given to him," the judgment stated, highlighting that the respondent was unfairly denied the chance to be represented adequately during the proceedings​​.

The court scrutinized the evidence presented, observing inconsistencies in the passenger statements and the absence of signatures on unpunched tickets to prove they were voluntarily surrendered by the respondent. "The statement of the passengers did not mention the exact starting point and destination, as well as the amount paid," Justice Singh pointed out, which cast doubt on the authenticity of the evidence against the conductor​​.

The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's finding that the DTC's failure to provide the necessary documents to the respondent violated natural justice principles. "The non-supply of the log book and absence of proper documents to prove that the petitioner was allowed to inspect the documents considered during the inquiry proceedings, vitiated the enquiry proceedings," the court concluded​​.

Justice Singh emphasized the importance of fair procedures, stating, "The enquiry officer has not explained that the respondent is entitled to a co-worker as a defense assistant. Such an opportunity is not given to him, which violates the principles of natural justice."

The High Court's decision to uphold the Labour Tribunal's ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to ensuring fair treatment in employment disputes. By affirming the necessity of adhering to natural justice principles, the judgment sends a clear message about the importance of procedural fairness in disciplinary inquiries. This landmark decision is expected to have significant implications for future employment-related cases, particularly in ensuring that procedural lapses do not undermine the rights of employees.

 

Date of Decision: May 14, 2024

Delhi Transport Corporation vs. Ram Avtar Sharma

 

Latest Legal News