Termination for repeated misconduct, including abuse and threat to a superior officer, held not disproportionate
Madras High Court Upholds Dismissal of Transport Corporation Conductor for Repeated Misconduct. Court Rejects Appeal by Widow, Affirms Decision Based on Past Disciplinary Record and Multiple Instances of Insubordination
In a significant judgment delivered by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, the dismissal of a conductor from the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation has been upheld due to repeated acts of misconduct involving abuse and threats towards a superior officer. The judgment, passed by Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and R. Vijayakumar, dismisses the appeal filed by A. Shanthi, the widow of the deceased petitioner, C. Aalagu, who had initially challenged his termination from service.
The case involved serious allegations against Aalagu, who was accused of threatening and abusing the Branch Manager on multiple occasions. The disciplinary proceedings followed due process, including an enquiry that substantiated the charges. Despite a second show cause notice, Aalagu failed to provide a response, leading to his dismissal in 1993. The Labour Court at Madurai upheld the dismissal in 2002, a decision which was subsequently challenged in the High Court.
The appellant argued that the dismissal was disproportionate, citing judgments where employees with unblemished records received lenient punishment for similar misconduct. However, the court distinguished these cases, noting Aalagu's history of disciplinary issues, including two prior instances of similar misconduct. The bench emphasized that the punishment was proportionate, considering the repeated nature of the offences and Aalagu’s insubordination towards the managerial position.
The judgment also addressed the contention that Aalagu was victimized due to his trade union activities, dismissing it as irrelevant to the proven misconduct. The court underscored that being an office bearer of a trade union does not provide immunity from disciplinary action for threatening and abusing a superior officer.
In conclusion, the High Court affirmed the principles of natural justice were upheld, and no prejudice was demonstrated due to non-furnishing of the enquiry report, as claimed by the appellant. The appeal was dismissed, reinforcing the stance that repeated misconduct warrants strict disciplinary action to maintain workplace decorum and respect for hierarchical authority.
Bottom Line:
Termination from service for repeated instances of misconduct, including abuse and threat to a superior officer, held not disproportionate - Past disciplinary record and repeated similar offenses taken into account in upholding dismissal.
Statutory provision(s): Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Section 11A
A.Shanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras)(DB)(Mad : Law Finder Doc id # 2781907
