DECISION ' This is an appeal against the order of the Labour Court ordering reinstatement of the respondent with all the benefits as if he continues to remain in the service.
2. There were some allegations of misconduct against the respondent and a show-cause notice dated 6th August, 1975 was served upon him. He submitted a reply dated 7th August, 1975. Again another show-cause notice dated 9th August, 1975 was served upon him for remaining absent without leave. To this, be also made a reply on 11th August, 1975. Yet there was third show-cause notice for remaining absent without leave and a reply dated 22nd September was given.
3. Since the explanations were not found satisfactory an inquiry was held and on the basis of that inquiry the respondent was dismissed from service. Aggrieved by this, he served a grievance notice and approached the Labour Court under section 25-A, I. R. O.
4. The application was resisted and various grounds were taken. The Labour Court, on the assessm ent of the evidence, rejected the contentions raised on behalf of the appellant and came to the conclusion that no proper inquiry was held and, therefore, the action taken against the respondent was vitiated. On the basis of this finding he ordered re-instatement with continuity of service. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal had been filed.
5. I confine myself to the question as to whether the inquiry which was held was in accordance with law or not. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and I entirely agree with Labour Court that no proper inquiry was held in this case and, therefore, the action taken against the respondent was vitiated. Even the learned counsel for the appellant half-heartedly made efforts to defend the action taken by the appellant. In fact, no inquiry was at all held. The respondent was simply asked to answer certain questions, as pointed out by the Labour Court, and thereafter the dismissal order was passed. This can hardly be treated to be an inquiry in accordance with law and the practice which is being followed in relation to the domestic inquiry.
6. In the circumstances I maintain the order passed by the Labour Court and dismiss the appeal. It is, however, open to the appellant to hold fresh inquiry against the respondent and take such action as may be deemed fit in accordance with law.