In the case of S Nambirajan v. High Court of Madras, a Suspended Labour Court judge moved the Supreme Court against disciplinary action against him by the High Court of Madras.
Supreme Court, initially reluctant to rule on the matter, later stated that:
“Issue notice returnable within four weeks. In the meantime, there shall ad-interim stay of the impugned order.”
Under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, a dispute case between the management and workmen was heard by Additional Labour Cort in Chennai. The petitioner was not the judge. The petitioner stated that the workman was not allowed to adduce the evidences. The petitioner found that there was no judicial order to mark any document. Then he asked the management to bring forth the original enquiry report, which could not be traced. The worker was reinstated with 25% backwages.
This was appealed before the Labour Court and the High Court stayed the orf=der of the Labour Court stating that:
“Labour Court judge deliberately over looked 105 pages of enquiry report….. Learned judge for some other unknown reason has given such a finding.”
A departmental action was issued against the petitioner by the High Court.
The petitioner also stated:
“It is submitted that the entire process culminating in the passing of the award by the Petitioner dated 28.06.2016 was in exercise of the powers which are vested in a Presiding Officer under Rule 39 of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958. It is submitted that enough opportunity was given to the parties to produce evidence.”
This matter shall be heard after 4 weeks.