The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition by Bank of Baroda challenging the Central Government Industrial Tribunal's (CGIT) awards, which declared the dismissal of Devshi Valji Kundadia illegal and unjustified. The CGIT's findings held the dismissal unsupported by credible evidence, emphasizing the perverse nature of the Enquiry Officer's findings and directing reinstatement with partial back wages.
The court upheld the principle that domestic inquiries must adhere to fairness and logical evidence evaluation. Any dismissal decision unsupported by credible evidence or based on unreliable testimony undermines natural justice.
1. Background and Dismissal
2. Tribunal Awards
3. High Court Review
4. Respondent’s Arguments
5. Bank’s Contentions
The dismissal order was unsupported by sufficient evidence. Domestic inquiries, while not bound by strict evidence rules, must base decisions on credible and logical evidence. Reliance on perverse findings or unreliable testimony breaches natural justice principles.
Labor law, employee dismissal, domestic inquiries, and principles of natural justice.
Domestic Inquiry, Misappropriation, Back Wages, Employee Rights, Natural Justice, Industrial Tribunal, Evidence Evaluation.
Citation: 2024 LawText (BOM) (12) 1902
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO. 9564 OF 2012
Date of Decision: 2024-12-19
Case Title: Bank of Baroda Versus Devshi Valji Kundadia
Before Judge: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
Advocate(s): Mr. Sudhir Talsania, Senior Advocate with Mr. Netaji Gawde, Mr. Rahul Sanghvi i/by. M/s. Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for the Petitioner. Respondent- Mr. Devshi Valji Kundhadia, present in person.
Appellant: Bank of Baroda
Respondent: Devshi Valji Kundadia