NIRMAL SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

Citation: [1985] 1 S.C.R. 317 · Decided: 09-08-1984 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
NIRMAL SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 
August 9, 1984 
(Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, C. J. AND A P. SEN, J.] 
Jndustrtol Disputes Act, 1947, sec. 12 (5)-0rder of Labour Commis· 
sioner refusing to refer dispute for adjudication to labour Court on the ground 
that the employee is not a er workman" but without givlng reasons for his !indiug 
- Validity of. 
The appellant was dismissed from the post of "Branch Manager11 by 
respondent No. 3, Bank, after an inquiry relati.~g to fraudulant encashment 
flf a draft by one Labh sing~. 
His demand in regai"d to his disn1issal, was 
rCferred by the Govt. of Punjab to the Conciliation Officer, who recommend-
ed that the appellant's ca!e should be forwarded for adjudication on the 
question whether his dissmissal from service was justified. 
The Labour 
Commissioner, exercising the powers of the State Governrnent, declined to 
refer the dispute to the Labour Court for adjudication but without giviag 
any reasons for his conclusion that the appellant was not a "workman". 
The appellant challenged before the High Court the decision of the Labour 
A 
B 
c 
D 
Commissioner in a writ petition which 
was dismissed summarily, 
Hence 
E 
this appeal. 
. 
The grievance of the appellant is that the Labour Commissioner 
ought to have given reasons in support of his decision. 
Allowing the appeal, 
HELD : 1. All that the Labour Commissioner has stated in the order 
is that the post held by the appellant did not fall 
within the category of 
"workman" but no reasons are given to justify that conclusion. 
He ought 
to have given reasons why he came to the conclusion that the appellant is 
not a "workman" within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Industrial 
Disputes Act, 1947. (319 D-E] 
2. In the instant case, the Court keeping in view that remanding the 
matter to the Labour Commissioner for giving his reasons will entail delay, 
directed the Labour Commissioner, Chandigarh to make a reference either 
F 
G 
\o t~e Labour Co~rt or t~ the Industrial Tribunal u/s. 12(5) of the Indu•trial 
ff, 
318 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1985] 1 s.c.R. 
A 
Disputes Act 1947 for adjudication of the question as to whether the dismls· 
sai of the appellant from the service of the Bank is legal and justified. 
[319 E·E) 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1746 of 
1980. 
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
the 4th September, 1979 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court 
in Civil Writ Petition No. 2780 of 1979. 
N. D. Garg, S. K. Bisaria and T. L. Garg for the appellant. 
Girish Chandra for Respondent No. 3. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
CHANDRACHUD, C. J. In April 1962, the appellant was appointed 
as a clerk in the Hoshiarpur Central Co.operative Bank Ltd., which 
is respondent 3 to this appeal. 
On August 10, 1976 he was trans· 
ferred as 'Branch Manager' of the Dholbaha branch of the Bank. 
On October 22, 1977 one Labh Singh s/o Harnam Singh opened an 
account in the Dholbaha Branch under an introduction given by one 
Bairam Singh. Two days later, Labh Singh deposited in that 
account a draft in the sum of Rs. 5,000 issued by the Royal Bank 
of Canada on the Chartered Bank, New Delhi. The amount due 
on the draft was credited by the Bank in Labh Singh's account on 
November 14. 
On that very day, Labh Singh withdrew a sum of 
Rs. 2, 500 
from his account. Three days hter, he withdrew the 
remaining amount of Rs. 2, 500. 
Soon thereafter, a person claiming 
to be the real Labh Singh in whose favour the draft was issued by 
the Royal Bank of Canada, complained to the Chartered Bank, New 
Delhi, that the draft was stolen and that the money due thereon 
was fraudulently collected by the person in whose name an account 
was opened in the Dholbaha branch. On November 10, 1978, the 
Executive Committee of respondent 3· Bank resolved that an enquiry 
be held for fixing responsibility in the matter of the fraudulent 
' 
encashment of the draft. 
The enquiry was held by the Chief Exe· 
cutive Officer, Satish Chander Dutt, who was of the rank of the 
Assistant Registrar in the Co-operative department. As a result of 
the report submitted by him, the appellant was dismissed from 
service on December 30, 1978. 
The demand raised by the appellant in regard to his dismissal 
'r"as referred b) the Goverflment of Punjab to t~e Conciliation 
•• 
• 
NIRMAL siNGH v. PUNJAB (Chandrachud, CJ.) 
319 
Officer, who recommended that the appellant's case should be 
forwarde

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.