https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286259 In proceedings for permission to discharge a workman under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Tribunal must examine whether a fair enquiry was held, the management acted bona fide, and the materials could lead a reasonable person to infer misconduct; it is not to reassess the evidence as an appellate body. On the record, the enquiry afforded cross-examination, interpretation in the workman's language, and no shown denial of defence evidence, so there was no violation of natural justice, victimisation, or mala fides. The Tribunal therefore applied the wrong test in refusing permission, though the proposed discharge was ultimately not enforced because the appellant undertook not to act on it. en-us Wed, 03 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Dec 2022 11:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286259 In proceedings for permission to discharge a workman under Section 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Tribunal must examine whether a fair enquiry was held, the management acted bona fide, and the materials could lead a reasonable person to infer misconduct; it is not to reassess the evidence as an appellate body. On the record, the enquiry afforded cross-examination, interpretation in the workman's language, and no shown denial of defence evidence, so there was no violation of natural justice, victimisation, or mala fides. The Tribunal therefore applied the wrong test in refusing permission, though the proposed discharge was ultimately not enforced because the appellant undertook not to act on it. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Feb 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286259