Case Overview
The brief fact of the case is that the company management issued a suspension order to a union representative for an act of indiscipline—leaving the workplace without prior permission from the concerned supervisor, instigating/gathering workmen, and engaging in riotous, disorderly behavior with the security supervisor. The suspension order stated that the management would issue a separate charge sheet, and a Domestic Enquiry would be conducted by appointing E.O & M.R.
However, the management did not issue any charge sheet, conduct an enquiry, or pay Subsistence Allowance during the suspension period, as per the provisions of the Standing Orders applicable to the company. After 3-4 months had passed, the management asked the delinquent worker to submit a good conduct bond/apology letter. They stated that no action would be initiated, and the suspension order would be withdrawn immediately if the worker complied. The delinquent employee refused, stating, "I have not committed any misconduct. Being a workers' representative, I was ensuring the proper safety of the workers."
With the help of other union representatives, the management resolved the issue without taking an apology letter or good conduct bond from the delinquent worker, and the suspension order was withdrawn. In the suspension withdrawal letter, the management narrated that the worker had committed serious misconduct, and the charges were proven in a preliminary/internal enquiry conducted by the management. They further mentioned that, considering the worker's long service with the company and based on the principles of natural justice and equity, a lenient view was taken, and the worker was warned.
Claim for Full Wages
The delinquent worker then resumed duties and filed an application claiming full wages for the suspension period. Since no charge sheets were issued, no domestic enquiry was conducted, and no charges were proved, the worker believed they were entitled to full wages. After receiving the full wages claim, the management released the applicable subsistence allowance, having not paid it during the suspension period.
Despite the exchange of letters between the delinquent worker and the management, the management refused to pay the full wages for the suspension period, claiming that the charges were proven in the preliminary enquiry. The worker argued that no charge sheet was issued, no charges were leveled against him, no enquiry officer was appointed, and no domestic enquiry was conducted; therefore, he was entitled to full wages.
Legal Proceedings
As the management did not pay the full wages claimed by the delinquent worker, he filed a complaint before the Asst. Labour Commissioner Authority. Since the management did not respond or appear before the authority, the authority is close to issuing a failure report and advising the worker to proceed to file a claim in the courts. The Authority has set a final date for the hearing, and we have filed written arguments with supporting legal points.
Conclusion and Request for Advice
In my view, since no charge sheet was issued, no charges were leveled against the delinquent worker, and no domestic enquiry was conducted, the worker, who did not admit his mistakes by submitting an apology letter or good conduct bond, is entitled to full wages. The management's act of withdrawing the suspension order on its own, merely stating that the charges were proven in a preliminary enquiry, is not sufficient, valid, or legally correct. According to the principles of natural justice and equity, even during a preliminary enquiry, the management should provide an opportunity for the worker to defend himself. The management's actions are illegal and baseless; hence, the delinquent worker is entitled to full wages for the suspension period.
In view of the above, I kindly request all experts to suggest and advise on points to be included in the final written argument and cite relevant case laws to be submitted before the Authority.
Thanks & Regards,
Shaikh.
The brief fact of the case is that the company management issued a suspension order to a union representative for an act of indiscipline—leaving the workplace without prior permission from the concerned supervisor, instigating/gathering workmen, and engaging in riotous, disorderly behavior with the security supervisor. The suspension order stated that the management would issue a separate charge sheet, and a Domestic Enquiry would be conducted by appointing E.O & M.R.
However, the management did not issue any charge sheet, conduct an enquiry, or pay Subsistence Allowance during the suspension period, as per the provisions of the Standing Orders applicable to the company. After 3-4 months had passed, the management asked the delinquent worker to submit a good conduct bond/apology letter. They stated that no action would be initiated, and the suspension order would be withdrawn immediately if the worker complied. The delinquent employee refused, stating, "I have not committed any misconduct. Being a workers' representative, I was ensuring the proper safety of the workers."
With the help of other union representatives, the management resolved the issue without taking an apology letter or good conduct bond from the delinquent worker, and the suspension order was withdrawn. In the suspension withdrawal letter, the management narrated that the worker had committed serious misconduct, and the charges were proven in a preliminary/internal enquiry conducted by the management. They further mentioned that, considering the worker's long service with the company and based on the principles of natural justice and equity, a lenient view was taken, and the worker was warned.
Claim for Full Wages
The delinquent worker then resumed duties and filed an application claiming full wages for the suspension period. Since no charge sheets were issued, no domestic enquiry was conducted, and no charges were proved, the worker believed they were entitled to full wages. After receiving the full wages claim, the management released the applicable subsistence allowance, having not paid it during the suspension period.
Despite the exchange of letters between the delinquent worker and the management, the management refused to pay the full wages for the suspension period, claiming that the charges were proven in the preliminary enquiry. The worker argued that no charge sheet was issued, no charges were leveled against him, no enquiry officer was appointed, and no domestic enquiry was conducted; therefore, he was entitled to full wages.
Legal Proceedings
As the management did not pay the full wages claimed by the delinquent worker, he filed a complaint before the Asst. Labour Commissioner Authority. Since the management did not respond or appear before the authority, the authority is close to issuing a failure report and advising the worker to proceed to file a claim in the courts. The Authority has set a final date for the hearing, and we have filed written arguments with supporting legal points.
Conclusion and Request for Advice
In my view, since no charge sheet was issued, no charges were leveled against the delinquent worker, and no domestic enquiry was conducted, the worker, who did not admit his mistakes by submitting an apology letter or good conduct bond, is entitled to full wages. The management's act of withdrawing the suspension order on its own, merely stating that the charges were proven in a preliminary enquiry, is not sufficient, valid, or legally correct. According to the principles of natural justice and equity, even during a preliminary enquiry, the management should provide an opportunity for the worker to defend himself. The management's actions are illegal and baseless; hence, the delinquent worker is entitled to full wages for the suspension period.
In view of the above, I kindly request all experts to suggest and advise on points to be included in the final written argument and cite relevant case laws to be submitted before the Authority.
Thanks & Regards,
Shaikh.