DOMESTIC ENQUIRY BEFORE
DISMISSAL OF WORKMEN: A CRITICAL
ANALYSIS
Labour Law-I
PROJECT
Submitted By: Submitted To:
Mohd Faiz Dr. Shally Victor
B.A.LL.B, 7th Sem Asst. Professor, Dept. of Law
21LLBWK290 AMU Centre, Malappuram
GM9280
1
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION
2. DISCIPLINARY ACTION: AN INTODUCTION
a) Background
b) What is a domestic enquiry?
c) When an enquiry is invoked
d) Procedure of enquiry
e) Chargesheet
f) Enquiry Proceeding
g) Findings
h) Decision
i) Service of order
3. REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
a) Where services of an advocate cannot be dispensed with
b) Where presenting office is a lawyer
c) When employer is represented by legally trained prosecutor
d) When provisions made by the service rules
e) Presentation Officer having adequate legal knowledge
f) Other circumstances
4. THE RIGHT OF A FAIR AND JUST TRIAL
a) A case against representation
b) Natural justice in labour laws
c) Appearance of advocates: A fair principle
5. CONCLUSION
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
2
“Take away all our money, our great work, our entire establishment, but leave our discipline
and organization, and in a few years, I shall have re-established myself.”1
INTRODUCTION
Discipline, indeed is the very basis of a well organised establishment and the management
must take interest in upholding this. However, the power to supervise this discipline should
not be used as a garb to arbitrarily dismiss or punish a workman. Every establishment is
expected to maintain Model Standing Orders or Standard Standing Orders which lay down
the bye laws of the industry including does dealing with misconduct and discipline With the
growing importance of the basic tenets of human rights and equality and fairness for all law
has made it necessary for an employer to work in a just and fair manner towards its workers
knowing that it is the weaker party in industrial relations. For this purpose courts have now
mandated employers to hold internal enquiries when misconduct or some other form of
indiscipline has occurred in the establishment. These enquiries mainly give an opportunity to
the worker to explain himself and defend himself from arbitrary punishment if his is
innocent. Further, the law mandates that such disciplinary proceedings are very crucial for a
worker who has his livelihood and dignity at stake. Thus, it is expected of employers to carry
out these enquiries in accordance with the principles of natural justice. However, there exists
a big controversy here as to the right of a worker to be represented by an advocate at such
enquiries to ensure smooth and efficacious running of such enquiry. One needs to see
whether such a right isa basic essential of natural justice or whether such a right would only
take away the informal atmosphere of a domestic enquiry. In order to answer these questions
the researcher will take the help of various judicial pronouncements and other legal
dimensions
DISCIPLINARY ACTION: AN INTRODUCTION
Background:
Most of Labour Law is judge made law. The Law relating to domestic enquiry particularly, is
mostly judge made. This is further argued by the fact that there is no statutory provision
which lays down that an enquiry must be held before punishment for misconduct, that
principles of natural justice must be followed in such enquiries, that the tribunal
can’t interfere with the findings of the enquiry officer, etc.2
What is a domestic enquiry?
An enquiry held by the management against its employees for certain acts of alleged
misconduct is called “Domestic enquiry”. Domestic enquiry is when fact-finding enquiries
are conducted in factories, industrial establishments etc, of a private sector. Such enquiries if
carried out against a Government Servant who is governed by the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, it
is known as “Departmental Inquiry.”3 Today it has become the law that no punishment for
1
Vijai Shanker, “Disciplinary Action & Natural Justice, Labour Law Journal, 1 LLJ 1971
2
Markanday Katju, Domestic Enquiry (Bombay; N.M.Tripathi Pvt Ltd, 1984)
3
D.R.K. Rao, “Domestic Enquiry Vs. Departmental Inquiry”, Labour Law Journal, 2005-I LLJ at 49
3
misconduct can begiven to an employee without first of all, proving that act and secondly,
without giving him a reasonable opportunity to defend himself in a proper domestic enquiry.4
When an enquiry is invoked:
For an enquiry to be initiated there must be misconduct on the part of the employee which the
employer has complained against. The Model Standing Orders under the Industrial (Standing
Orders) Act, 1946 provides for disciplinary action for misconduct and gives a list of acts
which can be regarded as misconduct. Further the employee must be in service of the
employer to have an enquiry proceeding against him. Once an employee has ceased to be in
service, the employer cannot call for such enquiry proceedings against him.
Procedure of Enquiry:
All establishments whether they have Standing Orders or they follow the Model Standing
Orders must necessarily follow certain procedural formalities before any punishment is
awarded. This is laid down in clause 25 of the Model Standing orders. Apart from this since
there is no set law as regards disciplinary proceedings, most procedures have been deduced
from various legal judgments. The procedure can be divided into the following steps:
Framing and issuing of a chargesheet;
Enquiry proceedings;
Findings;
Decision;
Service of the Order.
Chargesheet:
Once an employer feels there has been a misconduct and proceeds to carry out disciplinary
action against him, the first thing an employer must do is issue a charge-sheet to the
employee. Itis at this point that a domestic enquiry commences. The object of a charge-sheet
stems from the principles of natural justice that a person charged with an offence should
know his guilt and should get an opportunity to explain himself.5 After all the formalities of
receiving the chargesheet is fulfilled the next step is the enquiry proceeding.
Enquiry Proceeding:
Domestic enquiries do not apply in a situation where the employee admits the charges
levelled against him. Domestic enquiry proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature. This means
they are not totally judicial, and it describes only a duty cast on the executive body or
4
Kharda & Co. Ltd v. Its Workmen, 1963-II LLJ 452
5
Bata Shoe Co. Ltd v. Ganguly, (1961) 1 LLJ 303.
4
authority to conform to norms of judicial procedure in performing some act in exercise of its
executive powers.6
In such proceedings, the law requires that domestic tribunals should observe rules of natural
justice if they do so; their decision is not liable to be impeached on the ground that the
procedure followed was not in accordance with that which obtains in a court of law. In the
first step, the explanation given by the workman must be considered. If this explanation is
unsatisfactory, a notice giving the details of the upcoming enquiry along with the name of
the presiding officer will be served on the worker. The employee has a right to be represented
by his co-worker during the proceedings, and on the discretion of the employer may also be
represented by the union representative.7
Following this there will be examination and cross – examination of prosecution and defence
witnesses and the evidence deduced from this shall be recorded. The examination of
witnesses is done in a rather technical manner, whereby witnesses are to be examined one by
one as in a court of law, and they should not be allowed to overhear the evidence given by the
previous witness. The signature of the witness should be obtained at the conclusion of
evidence or in case the evidence is being interpreted to the employee, the signature of such
interpreter. At the end, the enquiry officer/presiding officer should sign the evidence of
subsequent witnesses.
The enquiry should be conducted with speed and efficiency. As far as possible, the enquiry
should be concluded in one sitting. However, if the proceedings protact it may be adjourned
to the next convenient date. In any case, the enquiry should not be postponed for a long
period and if it does so then suitable endorsements must be given with reasons for such delay.
However, keeping in mind the purpose of such enquiries, on should avoid delay as it may
effect the income of the workman seriously and may hamper the proper working of the
establishment as the management will be involved in such proceedings
Findings:
On completion of the enquiry, it is the duty of the enquiry officer to submit a report
containing his findings and the reasons therewith to the authorized authority to take
disciplinary action. Findings without basis or perverse findings should not be recorded. The
findings should be signed by the enquiry officer. It must be noted that the enquiry officer
should not recommend any punishment or make any other recommendation in his findings.
Decision:
The higher management such as works manager, general manager or director shall consider
the findings and if the workman seems guilty to them, they shall award appropriate
punishment in accordance with the standing orders. No punishment can be given on any
grounds not stated in a charge-sheet. This again follows from the basic principles of the
6
G.Nageshwar Rao v. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, AIR 1959 SC 30
7
N.Kalindi v. Telco, AIR 1960 SC 914
5
criminal procedure laid down in law. In awarding punishment, the fundamental principle is
that punishment should be in proportion with the nature and gravity of the punishment.
However, where the standing orders in the establishment provide a particular type of
punishment for a specific act of misconduct, the same shall be strictly followed.
Service of order:
Any order of punishment is required to be sent expeditiously to the employee in writing
which then completes the proceedings of the enquiry. The letter should make a reference to
the charge-sheet, the enquiry held, the findings of the enquiry officer, the decision and the
date from which the punishment is to be effective. These procedural aspects will vary in a
case where approval of a conciliation officer, court or tribunal is necessary for effecting the
punishment, as laid down inS.33 of the Industrial Disputes Act.
REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL
Previously we have seen the procedural aspects of a domestic enquiry. An enquiry is mostly
carried out on the basis of the rules laid down in the standing orders. If there are no rules then
the principles of natural justice should be followed and. In any case the enquiry officer should
always keep in mind that the proceeding should be carried out properly without any
arbitrariness and the proceeding being between two unequal parties there should fair
opportunity for both parties.
It is in the light of this that the question of representation arises. Can a worker demand a
representation by a lawyer as a matter of right?
The right to be represented through an advocate or an agent can be restricted or controlled by
statutes, rules, regulations or standing orders.8 Further it has often been stated that if Orders
did not provide such representation, that would not in any way vitiate the proceedings.9
Even the Supreme Court on a number of occasions have persisted with the view that
representation is not a matter of right to the employee. In the case of N. Kalindi v. Telco10, the
Supreme Court said that one must not forget that firstly these domestic enquiries are not
enquiries in the court of law, and in such enquiries fairly simple questions of fact as to
whether certain acts of misconduct were committed by a workman or not fall to be
considered. Further straight forward questioning which a person of fair intelligence and
knowledge of conditions prevailing in the Industry will be able to do and will ordinarily
help to elicit the truth. The court also pointed out here that it may happen that the accused
workman will be best suited, and able to cross-examine the witnesses who have spoken
against him and to examine witnesses in his favour.
8
Crescent Dyes and Chemicals Ltd v. Ram Naresh Tripathi, 1993 (66) FLR 537 (SC)
9
Prof. S.B.Rao, Handbook on Domestic and Departmental Enquiry, 3rd ed (Allahabad; Law Publishing House,
1997)at 142.
10
N. Kalindi v. Telco, AIR 1960 SC 914. See also, Cipla Ltd v. Ripu Daman Bhanot (1999) 4 SCC 188.
6
This point of view was further reiterated by the Court in Brooke Bond India Ltd. v.
Subbaraman11, in this the employer proceeded to hold an enquiry against two of its workmen,
one of whom demanded to be represented at the enquiry by his counsel and the other by an
outsider of his choice. The enquiry officer refused them such permission, but offered them
representation by a member of the union. Both workmen refused and withdrew from the
enquiry, after which the enquiry was carried out ex-parte and the management decided to
dismiss the workers. On appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held that the enquiry officer had
done everything which he was required to do under the law and the enquiry carried out by the
manager was regular and there was need of further interference
Where services of an advocate cannot be dispensed with:
However, there are certain circumstances which warrants the appearance of an advocate and
in fact some courts have said, that in such circumstances if the opportunity is not given to the
worker, this would amount to unfair labour practices and a violation of natural justice. The
circumstances are as follows:
Where presenting officer is a lawyer:
In the case of CL Subramanyan v. Collector of Customs, Cochin12, a trained prosecutor of the
status of a high police official was appointed as presentation officer and the request of a
delinquent to engage a lawyer of his choice to represent and defend him was rejected. It must
be kept in mind that the officer was not only a legal practitioner but a trained public
prosecutor. Further in this case the Government service rules gave the right to the
government servant to be represented by a lawyer. Thus, here the denial of the help of a
lawyer vitiated the enquiry.
The basic point here is that, the enquiry/presiding officer is a person chosen by the
management, in light of this there already exists a fear that the enquiry officer might be bias
towards the management who appointed him. In this scenario, if the officer is also a highly
qualified legal personnel, he may proceed with the same technicality as that of a court of law
and this may make it difficult for the workman to follow the proceedings and to put up a
sound defence.
When employer is represented by legally trained prosecutor:
Wherein an enquiry before the domestic tribunal, the delinquent employee is pitted against a
legally trained mind refusal to grant him permission to appear through an advocate would
amount to denial of a reasonable request and violation of essential principles of natural
justice. This was reiterated by the Court in The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay
v. Kumar R. Nadkarni13, where it said that
“apart from the provisions of laws, it is one of the basic principles of natural justice that the
enquiry should be fair and impartial. Even if there is no provision in the Standing Orders or
in law, wherein an enquiry before the domestic tribunal, the delinquent employee is pitted
11
1961 (II) LLJ 417 (SC). See generally, Dunlop Rubber Co. (I) Ltd v. Workmen, AIR 1965 SC 1392
12
CL Subramanyan v. Collector of Customs, Cochin , AIR 1975 SC 951.
13
The Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay v. Kumar R. Nadkarni , (1983) 1 LLJ 1
7
against a legally trained mind, if he seeks permission to appear through a legal practitioner
the refusal to grant this request would amount to denial of a reasonable request to defend
himself and the essential principles of natural justice would be violated.”
Following from the above decision, where the employer nominates his legal officer and
adviser as a presenting-cum-prosecuting officers and the delinquent worker is put up against
such legally trained personnel, it is essential to allow the delinquent employee to be
represented by a legal practitioner. Further if the rules put no such restrictions
then it would be in the best interest of justice to allow representation.
When provisions made by the service rules:
Where the service rules confer discretion in the enquiry officer or the employer to permit the
employee to be represented by a lawyer, it is justifiable and could be then examined by the
court if the employee did not get the opportunity to exercise the discretion.14 One case to
make this situation clear is where the employer nominated a police inspector of the Anti-
corruption Department, who is specially trained in conducting prosecution, to conduct the
enquiry and the right of representation by a lawyer was denied to the employee, it was held it
violated the principles of natural justice.15
In case of a government servant, the disciplinary authority decides whether it should sanction
the right to allow the employee to engage a lawyer, on the basis of the facts and
circumstances
Presentation Officer having adequate legal knowledge:
The presentation officer need not be a lawyer, for the delinquent to insist on having an
advocate represent him. Its enough if the presenting officer has a sufficient knowledge of law
and has been trained in the techniques of a disciplinary proceedings. For example, where the
presenting officer is a CBI inspector, this situation is enough to warrant the services of a
lawyer.16
Other circumstances:
Firstly, when a joint enquiry against two Government servants is being conducted and if the
department has appointed a presenting officer and if the co-delinquent had an officer, to
defend him, fair play and justice demands that the enquiry officer should have enquired from
the delinquent employee whether he would like to engage someone to defend him. Also,
where the facts are complicated and the gravity of charges are high and the employee is not
educated or skilled enough to handle such situations then a lawyer maybe engaged to defend
him. In one case because of the gravity of charges being investigated in the domestic enquiry
14
Prof. S.B.Rao, Handbook on Domestic and Departmental Enquiry, 3rd ed (Allahabad; Law Publishing
House,1997) at 143
15
T.Muniswami v. State of Mysore, (1963) 3 LLJ 694.
16
Prof. S.B.Rao, Handbook on Domestic and Departmental Enquiry, 3rd ed (Allahabad; Law Publishing
House,1997) at 147.
8
(fraud and forgery) and if such charges are tried in a criminal court, the accused would have a
right to be represented, the delinquent was allowed to be represented by a lawyer.17
However, courts, have given varying decisions in this regard and in the next chapter the
researcher will decide the need of a lawyer in domestic proceedings or whether they are a
mere nuisance to such internal proceedings
As seen above in certain circumstances where it seems that grave injustice will be done, the
enquiry officer may allow the right of representation. However, this judgment will from case
to case as per the circumstances and nuances involved. Besides this the said right also
depends on the standing orders or service rules. If such a right is not recognized in the
standing order, such refusal does not vitiate a proceeding18. A proceeding is vitiated when a
workman is unable to defend himself, either because he is illiterate19 or because he is unable
to understand the complexities of the case or for other reasons. However, in all such
situations the court does not vitiate proceedings. If it is seen that though representation was
not allowed, yet there was no hint of bias proceedings or arbitrary action, then such will not
be set aside. Thus, we see that there is no precedent set in this respect and having a fair idea
of the existing situation it is left to one, to understand the best possible solution to this and
therefore in the next segment, the researcher has aimed at analyzing the existing trend. and
whether it is fair and just.
THE RIGHT OF A FAIR AND JUST TRIAL
A Case against representation:
It is well understood that a domestic enquiry is an internal proceeding and not one in a court
of law. Further very simple questions are asked in these proceedings as the object of this
enquiry is only to see whether certain misconducts were committed by the workman or not.
Further in the Telco case it was argued that the questions are simple enough that a person of
fair intelligence and knowledge of conditions prevailing in the industry would be able to do.20
Further the involvement of lawyers, it is argued will necessarily make the proceedings more
technical and this will detract from the informality of proceedings, thereby, impeding smooth
and expeditious settlement. However, one cannot blame lawyers for bringing their legal
training and experience to the aid and benefit of their clients as it is well established that
labour disputes necessarily entails two unequal parties.
It is worth mentioning that even under the provisions of the industrial Disputes Act the
appearance of a legal practitioner is totally prohibited in conciliatory proceedings and
restricted as far as adjudication proceedings go. It must therefore, not be in consonance with
the policy to allow an advocate to participate in purely fact-finding proceedings before
domestic tribunal and allowing the proceedings to be influenced by strict rules of evidence. In
this respect, it is further argued that principle of natural justice would be complied with if the
17
Photographic Co. Ltd v. Saumitra Mohan Kumar, (1984) 1 LLJ 471.
18
H.L.Kumar, Misconducts, Chargesheets and Enquiries, 5th ed (New Delhi; Metropolitan, 1992) at 230.
19
Workmen of Madura Co. Ltd v. Labour Court, (1966) 1 LLJ 498.
20
AIR 1960 SC 914. See also, Cipla Ltd v. Ripu Daman Bhanot (1999) 4 SCC 188.
9
delinquent workman was allowed to be represented by a co-worker of his choice. However,
such a situation is not a viable option. The fight should be between equals and a co-worker
may possess the same disabilities as that of the delinquent workman and may not have the
sufficient qualifications and knowledge.
This, then brings us to deeper issues of industrial relations and inequality of bargaining power
of the workmen and how the law and the legislature have tried to bridge the gap or at least
make amends.
Natural justice in labour laws:
Rules of natural justice are not embodied rules nor can they be elevated to the position of
fundamental rights. In Kraipak v.Union of India21, the Court observed, the aim of rules of
natural justice is to secure justice or to put in negatively to prevent miscarriage of justice.
Further these rules of natural justice can operate only in areas not covered by any law validly
made. In other words, they do not supplant the law but supplement.
The point is that if the Courts can read statutory provisions consistently with the principles of
natural justice, then it should do so because it is presumed that the legislatures and the
statutory authorities intend to act in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
However, if a statutory provision, either specifically or by necessary implication excludes the
application of any of the rules of natural justice then the court cannot ignore the mandate of
the legislature or the statutory authorities.22
Thus, this case held that quasi-judicial enquiries must be held in good faith, without bias and
not arbitrarily and unreasonably.
Further in one case the court held that though the right to employment is not a fundamental
right, but after employment to a post or office, be it under the state, its instrumentality,
juristic person or private entrepreneur, an employee must be dealt with as per public element
and in public interest assuring him equality under Art.14 of the Constitution and all
concomitant rights arising from it.23 Thus, proving the need of upholding principles of natural
justice so that everyone person can be treated equally.
Thus, keeping these ideas in mind, we shall now embark on a discussion of the legality and
importance of a lawyer representing a delinquent workman in enquiry proceedings.
Appearance of advocates: A fair principle
Up to this point we have seen that case law and authors have said that a workman has no right
to be represented by an advocate in domestic enquiries and the opposite view is only
an exception culled out in pressing situations. However, with the strengthening of the
principles of natural justice and the agreement of courts that such enquiries are quasi-
judicial in nature, therefore one must necessarily pass judgment in fairness and good faith.
21
Kraipak v.Union of India , AIR 1970 SC 150.
22
L.C.Malhotra, Dismissal, Discharge, Term of Service and Punishment, at 103
23
Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Union, (1997) 9 SCC 377
10
In Nitya Ranjan v. State24 , the court held that though legal assistance is generally prohibited
in domestic enquiry, yet in certain circumstances where there is complexity in facts, volumes
of evidence, the educational attainments and experience of the delinquent workman etc. And
these factors show that without legal assistance he may not be able to establish his innocence,
then the rule can be broken and the exception of allowing an advocate be brought in. In fact,
the court said that in such circumstances, denial of legal assistance may be equivalent to
denial of ‘reasonable opportunity’ and the entire proceeding can be quashed.
Here again see the assertion of principles of natural justice which demands fair trial and
reasonable opportunity to every person. This was further reiterated in another court where the
charges against the delinquent were of falsification of accounts, misappropriation of
Government money, acceptance of illegal gratification etc. there were as many as 93
witnesses examined and a large number of documents presented. In fact the enquiry went on
for three years with three enquiry officers succeeding one another. In the facts and
circumstances of the case it was seen that the disciplinary authority acted contrary to A.311
(2) of the Constitution in denying the representation of the petitioner by a lawyer at the
enquiry and thus deprived him of the reasonable opportunity granted to a public servant. Thus
the proceedings were vitiated.25
Besides the fairness and humanitarian angle to this, there are other reasons which make the
appearance of an advocate in an enquiry important. Firstly, if an advocate is present at the
enquiry there is more chances that the proceedings will be held properly as the legal
practitioner will see to the efficacy of the proceedings and see whether all the formalities are
fulfilled. Further there is fear that since the presiding officer is selected by the management
itself, there may be bias and unfair practices on its part.
Secondly, if u allow an advocate to present the case of a delinquent workman, this would
elevate the status of the proceedings as it will be looked at with more seriousness and it will
be believed that the appearance of the advocate will make the proceedings more technical and
formal to the extent of fair and just proceedings.
Thirdly, if there is an advocate arguing the case, it is most likely that it would keep the legal
aspects in mind, thus avoiding arbitrary enquiries and even more arbitrary findings. This
will bring faith in the domestic enquiry and a will to solve the issue quickly. This will avoid
congestion of cases at the Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal.
Lastly, once you say that the principles of natural justice must be followed, this necessarily
entails that the proper procedures of law must be complied with leading to the natural
conclusion that the procedures laid down under the Civil Procedure Code is best suited to be
followed as far as procedure goes. Thus, once the CPC is brought in, the procedure and
24
Nitya Ranjan v. State , AIR 1962 Orissa 78
25
Baidhar Das v. The State and Ors, AIR 1970 Ori 320
11
charges become difficult for the worker to understand and therefore, the representation of
such workman through an advocate would be advisable and fair
CONCLUSION
The above chapter reinforces the fact that a person who is entitled to appear in person to
defend himself before a domestic tribunal is also entitled, in the absence of an express
provision to be represented by a lawyer. It would be contrary to principles of natural justice
to allow one side to be represented by a lawyer or that the presiding officer maybe well
versed in the legal practice. In considering whether natural justice implies a right to
representation, one must recall that natural justice demands only minimum safeguards of fair
adjudication, and not ideal standards, further as discussed above these principles only
supplement and not overrule any existing law in practice. However, a person threatened
with social or financial ruin by disciplinary proceedings in a purely domestic enquiry may be
gravely prejudiced if he is denied legal representation. Development of case law on implied
rights of legal representation in non-statutory areas should, therefore, be guided by a realistic
appraisal of the interests of the person claiming it, as well as of the interests of the
organization to which he belongs. In fact, in the recent past we have seen the situation is
changing and the right to legal representation is slowly finding its way into such disciplinary
proceedings as it now seen as one of the tools of a fair and just enquiry. This stems from the
fact there is more awareness today as to one’s rights and liabilities and issues of right to
employment and livelihood as a corollary to human rights is no more a talk of the privileged,
but is now something embedded in every human being. Also, after liberalization courts have
started showing concern towards the worker population and are now reluctant to pass
judgment which may harm their dignity and position in society.
Therefore, in the light of all this, the right of representation of workman by a legal
practitioner is only a small step in ensuring justice and fairness and thus courts should keep
this is mind when making judicial pronouncement.
12
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Articles:
1. D.R.K. Rao, “Domestic Enquiry Vs. Departmental Inquiry”, Labour Law Journal, 2005
ILLJ at 49.
2. E.M.Rao, Industrial jurisprudence (New Delhi; Lexis Nexis, 2004)
3. P.Naresh Kumar, “ Law on representation through legal practitioners before
LabourCourts and Tribunals,” Labour Law Journal (Articles), 2003- 1 LLJ at 10-17.
4. Shantimal Jain, “Representation before Domestic Tribunal,” Labour and Industrial
Cases, 1987 Lab.I.C. Jour 4 (1)
5. Vijai Shanker, “Disciplinary Action & Natural Justice, Labour Law Journal, 1971-1
LLJat (vi- xvii).
Books:
1. P.L.Malik, Industrial Law,16th ed (Lucknow; Eastern Book Co., 1992).
2. A.S.Ramachandra
Rao, Law relating to Departmental Enquiries for GovernmentServants, 2nd ed (Delhi;
Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd,2003).
3. L.C.Malhotra, Dismissal, Discharge, Term of Service and Punishment, at 103.
4. O.p.Malhotra, at 1054.
5. Markanday Katju, Domestic Enquiry (Bombay; N.M.Tripathi Pvt Ltd, 1984).
6. H.L.Kumar, Misconducts, Chargesheets and Enquiries, 5th ed (New Delhi;
Metropolitan,1992).
7. Prof. S.B.Rao, Handbook on Domestic and Departmental Enquiry, 3rd
ed (Allahabad;Law Publishing House, 1997)
13
