Skip to content


Abdul Wahab Vs. Divisional Engineer, M.P. Electricity Board and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 2199 of 1970
Judge
Reported inAIR1977SC2079; [1977(35)FLR339]; 1977LabIC1552; (1977)4SCC604; 1976(8)LC313(SC)
AppellantAbdul Wahab
RespondentDivisional Engineer, M.P. Electricity Board and anr.
DispositionAppeal Dismissed
Excerpt:
.....award in the estimation of damages for wrongful termination of the contract. a single judge of the high court substantially confirmed the arbitrator's award. the govern- ment took the matter in appeal to a division bench of the high court and the two appeals filed were allowed by that bench and the award was set aside. it was contended on behalf of the appellants that the high court could not have interfered with the award of the arbitrator as there was no error on the face of the award; that the arbitrator was not bound to give -reasons for estimating the damages to which the appellant was entitled and that he had not in fact given any such reasons. held : allowing the appeal (per bhargava and raghubar dayal, jj.). the arbitrator in fixing the amount of compensation had not proceeded to..........the appellant. the appellant challenged that order before the labour court/section 31(3) of the madhya pradesh/under industrial relations act, 1960. the labour court upheld the order of dismissal but its award was set aside in revision by the industrial court. being aggrieved by the latter judgment, the electricity board filed an application in the high court of madhya pradesh under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution. the writ petition was allowed by the high court by its judgment dated april 13, 1970. the high court reopened the order passed by the labour court upholding the appellant's dismissal. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the high court.2. mr. naunit lal who appears on behalf of the appellant contends that the appellant's dismissal is.....
Judgment:

Y.V. Chandrachud, J.

1. Seven charges were framed against the appellant in a departmental enquiry held by the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board. Those charges were accepted by the Enquiry Officer and as a result of his findings, an order of dismissal was passed against the appellant. The appellant challenged that order before the Labour Court/Section 31(3) of the Madhya Pradesh/under Industrial Relations Act, 1960. The Labour Court upheld the order of dismissal but its award Was set aside in revision by the Industrial Court. Being aggrieved by the latter judgment, the Electricity Board filed an application in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The writ petition was allowed by the High Court by its judgment dated April 13, 1970. The High Court reopened the order passed by the Labour Court upholding the appellant's dismissal. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court.

2. Mr. Naunit Lal who appears on behalf of the appellant contends that the appellant's dismissal is indefensible, based as it is on an alleged misconduct entirely unconnected with his official duties. Having gone through the judgments of the Labour Court, Industrial Court and the High Court and having had a fresh look at the evidence we see no reason for interfering with the view that the order of dismissal is justified and is supported by evidence relating to the appellant's official discharge of duties.

3. This appeal must therefore fail, but there will be no order as to costs. We must record that learned Counsel for the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board had assured this Court that if the appellant applied afresh for the post of a lower division clerk, that application will be considered favourably and sympathetically.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //