Jagadeesh C.S. v. The Secretary, Karannur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Labour Court, Kozhikode

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN`** ## **`&`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 632 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 7781/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ``` ## **`APPELLANT/PETITIONER:`** ``` JAGADEESH C.S. AGED 45 YEARS S/O. SIDHARTHAN NAIR, CHOORAPILAKKAL, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE-673 303 BY ADV P.RAMAKRISHNAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE SECRETARY M/S. KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE-673 303 2LABOUR COURT, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 001 BY ADV P.P.JACOB ``` ``` THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2023, ``` ``` ALONG WITH WA.634/2022, 684/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 2 ``` # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN`** ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 634 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 10307/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF ``` ## **`KERALA`** ## **`APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT IN WPC:`** ``` JAGADEESH C. S. AGED 45 YEARS S/O. SIDHARTHAN NAIR, CHOORAPILAKKAL, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE 673 303. ``` ``` BY ADV P.RAMAKRISHNAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC:`** |**`1`**|**`THE KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.F 1244`**| |---|---| ||**`KANNUR, KOZHIKODE - 673 303,`**| ||**`REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY`**| |**`2`**|**`LABOUR COURT,`**| ||**`KOZHIKODE, C BLOCK, CALICUT CIVIL STATION,`**| ||**`KOZHIKODE - 673 020.`**| ||**`BY ADV P.P.JACOB`**| ``` THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2023, ``` ``` ALONG WITH WA.632/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 3 ``` # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN ``` ``` & ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WA NO. 684 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 10307/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF ``` ``` KERALA ``` ## **`APPELLANT/PETITIONER:`** ``` KARANNUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO. F 1244 KANNUR, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. ``` ``` BY ADVS. P.P.JACOB MARIYAM JACOB RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ``` |**`1`**|**`JAGADEESH C.S.`**| |---|---| ||**`CHOORAPILAKKAL, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE-673 303.`**| |**`2`**|**`THE LABOUR COURT,`**| ||**`KOZHIKODE, C BLOCK, CALICUT, CIVIL STATION,`**| ||**`KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 020.`**| ||**`BY ADV SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN(B/O)`**| ``` THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2023, ALONG WITH WA.632/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 4 ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** **[WA Nos.632/2022, 634/2022, 684/2022] Dated this the 14[th] day of December, 2023** ## **Anu Sivaraman, J.** W.A. Nos.632/2022 and 634/2022 are filed by the aggrieved workman, while W.A. No.684/2022 is filed by the employer/cooperative society. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated by the employer against the workman, who was working as salesman in a Neethi Medical Store and his services were terminated by order dated 20.04.2018. An Industrial Dispute was raised before the Labour Court in which an I.A. was filed seeking to set aside the enquiry report and the dismissal order in view of the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in **Kodenchery Service Co-operative Bank Limited v. Joshy Varghese** [2020 (4) KLT 129]. 2. The Labour Court passed an award setting aside the disciplinary proceedings based on the charge memo on the ground that the charge memo had been issued by the disciplinary subcommittee. The reliefs ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 5 ``` ## granted there is as follows: _“(1) Disciplinary proceedings conducted by the disciplinary subcommittee based on Ext.P1 charge memo issued by that committee is legally invalid and the enquiry report is set aside with liberty to the management to take action against the petitioner in accordance with law._ _(2) It would be open to the management to reinstate the workman in service, or to pay full salary during the period of disciplinary proceedings if they propose to initiate action availing the liberty granted._ _(3) If disciplinary proceedings are initiated it shall be concluded within three months. If no disciplinary proceedings are being initiated or no proceedings are concluded within three months, the workman shall be reinstated in service.”_ 3. The workman challenged the award to the extent it granted liberty to the management to initiate fresh disciplinary proceedings while the employer-society challenged the award on the ground that the enquiry proceedings were valid and legal and the imposition of the penalty was proper. Both the writ petitions were heard together and a common judgment was rendered. It was recorded that fresh chargesheet has been issued and enquiry is going on. The writ petitions were, therefore, disposed of directing the enquiry to be completed and payment of the salary to the workman till then. ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 6 ``` 4. The learned counsel for the appellant/workman submits that the findings of the Labour Court can no longer be sustained in view of the law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in **Mattannur Cooperative Rural Bank Ltd. v. Co-operative Arbitration Court** [ILR 2023 (3) Kerala 863]. It is submitted that the finding of the Division Bench in **Kodenchery Service Co-operative Bank Limited** **v. Joshy Varghese** (cited supra) has been held to be not good law and it has been categorically held by the Full Bench that a charge memo issued by the disciplinary subcommittee is legal and valid. It is submitted that the entire matter now has to go back to the Labour Court for a consideration on merits. 5. Having considered the contentions advanced, we are of the opinion that in the light of the judgment of the Full Bench which held that the charge memo issued by the disciplinary sub committee would also be valid, the issue has now to be reconsidered by the Labour Court on merits. 6. It is submitted that the workman had been paid salary on the basis of the judgment of the learned single Judge as well as the interim ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 7 ``` order dated 28.06.2022 in W.A. Nos.632/2022 and 634/2022. The payment of salary to the workman will also be subject to the orders to be passed by the Labour Court. However, the fact that the payments were made on the basis of the setting aside of the disciplinary proceedings by the Labour Court and by virtue of the judgment of the learned single Judge and the interim order passed in W.A. Nos.632/2022 and 634/2022 shall be taken note of by the Labour Court while passing orders as directed above. These writ appeals are ordered accordingly. ``` Sd/- ``` ## **`ANU SIVARAMAN`** ``` JUDGE ``` ``` Sd/- ``` ## **`C. PRATHEEP KUMAR`** ``` JUDGE ``` ``` NP ``` ``` WA NO.632/2022 and con. cases ``` ``` 8 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WA 632/2022`** ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: NIL ``` ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: Exhibit R1TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CALCULATION OF THE PAY SCALE FROM 17.2.2021 ON WARDS TILL 31.5.2022 ```