IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU
WRIT APPEAL No.570 OF 2012
Southern Power Distribution Company
of A.P. Ltd., Rep., by Superintending
Engineer(O), Operation Circle, Nellore,
and another.
..Appellants
Versus
The Labour Court,
Rep., by Presiding Officer,
Guntur, and another.
...Respondents
ORAL JUDGMENT Dt:17.10.2022 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
1. This writ appeal would call in question the order dated 22.06.2011 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.12434 of 2008.
2. The facts in brief are that while the writ petitioner-Syed Amjad Ali (respondent No.2 in this appeal) was working as Revenue Cashier in A.P. State Power Distribution Company Limited, Nellore, on certain allegations, he was charge sheeted and after enquiry, he was HCJ & DVSS,J 2 W.A.No.570 of 2012 dismissed from service by proceedings dated 16.07.1996 and in the subsequent appeal, he was unsuccessful and hence, he raised an industrial dispute vide I.D.No.40 of 2003 on the file of the Labour Court, Guntur. On 31.12.2007, the Labour Court passed an award holding that the charge of misappropriation is not proved, and ordered for compulsory retirement of the writ petitioner from service. Aggrieved by the same, W.P.No.12434 of 2008 had been preferred.
3. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition and set aside the award of the Labour Court holding that as the impugned order of punishment has been passed under the regulations made under Section 79 (c ) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which have no legal sanctity as they were neither notified by the Government as required under Section 13-B of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act nor certified by the Certifying Officer under Section 5 of the said Act, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in U.P.S.E. Board v. Hari Shanker reported in 1978 LAB I.C.1657 and the judgment of the single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, in the case of Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operations), A.P. Transco Limited v. Labour Court, Guntur, reported in 2011 (3) ALT 530, the impugned order cannot be sustained.
HCJ & DVSS,J 3 W.A.No.570 of 2012
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in the case at hand, the Labour Court also conducted an independent enquiry and even though standing orders were not notified or certified, they would have no impact on the legality of the order of punishment.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner (respondent No.2 herein) would submit that this matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operations), A.P. Transco Limited v. Labour Court, Guntur, and the same has been conceded by the learned standing counsel for the appellants before the writ Court as mentioned in paragraph No.5 of the order under appeal.
6. Even though there is a concession made by the learned standing counsel for the appellants before the learned single Judge, we have independently examined the correctness of the impugned order rendered by the learned single Judge. We find no reason to disagree with the findings recorded by the learned single Judge in the impugned order based on the law rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in U.P.S.E. Board v. Hari Shanker and the judgment of the learned single Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operations), A.P. Transco Limited.
HCJ & DVSS,J 4 W.A.No.570 of 2012
7. Undisputedly, the regulation under which the appellants proceeded to conduct enquiry against the writ petitioner was neither notified by the Government as required under Section 13-B of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act nor certified by the Certifying Officer under Section 5 of the said Act. If that be so, the learned single Judge had no other option except to follow the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U.P.S.E. Board v. Hari Shanker and the judgment of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operations) referred to supra. We find no merit in this appeal.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. All the pending miscellaneous applications including I.A.No.1 of 2015 (W.A.M.P.No.736 of 2015) shall stand dismissed. PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J Nn HCJ & DVSS,J 5 W.A.No.570 of 2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU WRIT APPEAL No.570 OF 2012 (per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ) Dt:17.10.2022 Nn