Telangana HC dismisses Tata Boeing Aerospace petition against workmen

The court said that if the additional evidence submitted by one of the litigants relates to the merits of the dispute, then the tribunal can allow such documents to be brought on record.

Justice T. Madhavi Devi was dealing with a petition filed by Tata Boeing Aerospace Ltd of Adibatla, which challenged the decision of labour court-1, Hyderabad in an industrial dispute filed by the workmen, by allowing the additional documents and evidence on record. The company contended that as the domestic inquiry was declared valid, the workmen cannot now bring any new evidence on record as it is barred by the Proviso to Section 11(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act.

The brief facts of the issue was that some employees of Tata Boeing Aerospace Ltd were removed from service on the grounds that they were unauthorizedly absent for a period of 10 to 16 days. Out of 500 employees, who abstained from duties, for the charges of unauthorized absence, some were let off with deduction of 18 days wages, while 100 employees were charge sheeted and some others let off with minor punishment like withholding two annual increments and continuity of service. Some were removed from service. The workmen, who were fired, approached the labour court challenging the removal order and during the pendency of the dispute, the labour court allowed additional evidence.

In fresh evidence, the workmen submitted about how their employer was victimizing them only because the workman had formed a union and the management wanted to suppress their unity. They highlighted the differential treatment given to different employees when 500 personnel had abstained from work.

Challenging the labour court’s nod to additional evidence, the company approached the High Court, which upheld the decision of the labour court.