Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
-
Upload
angelicpriya -
Category
Documents
-
view
251 -
download
1
Transcript of Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
1/7
Kusheshwar Dubeyvs Bharat CokingCoal Ltd. & Ors
1988 A! "118
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
2/7
#a$ts
%he aellant is an e'loyee in the Balihari Colliery o(the !esondent )o.1. *e was working as an ele$tri$al
heler.
n 198+ he was alleged (or hysi$ally assaulting asuervising o,$er- (or whi$h he was sube$ted to bothdis$ilinary ro$eedings and a $ri'inal rose$ution.
%he aellant /led a $ivil a$tion asking (or inun$tion
against the dis$ilinary a$tion ending $ri'inal trial-0in$e both the dis$ilinary ro$eedings and $ri'inaltrial were taken si'ultaneously.
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
3/7
%he trail $ourt 'ade an order staying (urther ro$eedingsin the dis$ilinary a$tion till disosal o( the $ri'inal $ase.
%he !esondent )o. aealed against the order and the
aeal was dis'issed by the aellate $ourt.
%hereuon the resondent )o.1 'oved the high $ourt inits revisional urisdi$tion.
%he high $ourt allowed the revision ali$ation and set
aside the i'ugned order on the ground that there is nobar (or an e'loyer to ro$eed with the deart'entalro$eeding with regard to the sa'e allegation (or whi$h a$ri'inal $ase is ending.
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
4/7
Contentions in the 0L
%he aellant $ontends that2
1. %he legal osition settled by this $ourt suorted thestand that the dis$ilinary a$tion had to be stayed till the
$ri'inal $ase was over.
". %hat there are also authorities in suort o( theosition that there is nothing wrong in arallelro$eedings being taken3 one by way o( the dis$ilinary
ro$eeding and the other in the $ri'inal $ourt. 4. %hat the $ourt should settle the law in a straight a$ket
(or'ula as udi$ial oinion aear to be $on5i$ting.
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
5/7
ssue
6hether there should or should not besi'ultaneity o( the ro$eedings 7$ri'inal trialand dis$ilinary ro$eedings
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
6/7
!easoning
Court held that while there $ould be no legal bar (or si'ultaneousro$eedings being taken- yet- there 'ay be $ases where it would bearoriate to de(er dis$ilinary ro$eedings awaiting disosal o( the$ri'inal $ase. And that in the latter $lass o( $ases it would be oen tothe delin:uent e'loyee to seek su$h an order o( stay or inun$tion(ro' the $ourt.
#urther stated that whether- in the (a$ts and $ir$u'stan$es o( aarti$ular $ase- there should or should not be su$h si'ultaneity o( thero$eedings would then re$eive udi$ial $onsideration and the $ourt willde$ide in the given $ir$u'stan$es o( a arti$ular $ase as to whether the
dis$ilinary ro$eedings should be interdi$ted- ending $ri'inal trial. t is neither ossible nor advisable to evolve a hard and (ast- straight;
a$ket (or'ula valid (or all $ases and o( general ali$ation withoutregard to the arti$ularities o( the individual situation.
-
8/18/2019 Kusheshwar Dubey vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd & Ors.
7/7
*eld
0e$ial leave allowed.
Order o( the high $ourt va$ated and that o( the
trial $ourt is restored.
%he $ri'inal a$tion and the dis$ilinaryro$eedings were grounded uon the sa'e seto( (a$ts. %he dis$ilinary ro$eedings should
have been stayed and the high $ourt was notright in inter(ering with the trial $ourts order o(inun$tion whi$h had been a,r'ed in aeal.