Gujarat High Court
Ranchhodbhai Bhikhabhai Nayi vs Divisional Director on 18 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1396 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
NO
==========================================================
RANCHHODBHAI BHIKHABHAI NAYI
Versus
DIVISIONAL DIRECTOR
==========================================================
Appearance:
ANURADHA G RATHOD(7717) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR GK RATHOD(2386) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR HAMESH C NAIDU(5335) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 18/02/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the award passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Vadodara in Reference (IT) No.7 of 2023, which came to be dismissed and the penalty imposed by the appellate authority for stoppage of increment for three years with future effect came to be confirmed.
2. The facts leading to the dismissal of the present petition are that the petitioner was subjected to domestic inquiry regarding allegations of misconduct. The inquiry officer found that the petitioner failed to issue valid ticket to a passenger, which led to an excess collection of Rs.420/- from the EBTM machine assigned to the petitioner. The disciplinary authority considered that the petitioner had been involved in at least 17 similar cases of misconduct during his tenure of 22 years of service. The petitioner filed a Reference before the learned Tribunal, seeking to Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025 undefined set aside the order of punishment and for the directions to pay the monetary benefit. However, learned Tribunal, at the end, has dismissed the Reference, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.
3. Heard the learned advocates Ms.Rathod appearing for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Naidu appearing for the respondent.
4. The matter was heard by this Court on 05.02.2025 and on conclusion of the arguments, it was kept for the dictation today.
5. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that the incident occurred due to a minor defect in the EBTM machine, which prevented the tickets from being printed, however, the amount had already been credited to the system, and the summary ticket number was also recorded as 035523. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that due to the insistence of the passenger for a ticket, the petitioner issued a reservation ticket with a handwritten note mentioning the amount and ticket number, which matches the handwriting of the present petitioner.
5.1. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that the petitioner is not at all held responsible for such misconduct, and no irregularity has been committed by the petitioner and the amount of fare which is received from the passenger is already deposited to the corporation, as reflected in the summary ticket Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025 undefined number therefore, no question arise of misappropriation of the fund of the corporation. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that the timings are also mentioned on the ticket so as to clearly prove before the court that before the inspection, the said handwritten tickets were already issued to the passengers since the EBTM machine failed to print them. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that by imposing the punishment of stoppage of three increments, the inquiry officer and the learned Tribunal has failed to consider the severity of punishment, which indicates a clear dis- proportionality.
5.2. Learned advocate Ms. Rathod submits that the petitioner has suffered an approximate financial loss of Rs. 11,11,000/- adversely affecting his retirement benefits, including entitlement to PF, Gratuity, and Pension. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that the punishment imposed by the Inquiry Officer, which was subsequently confirmed by the learned Tribunal, has had a substantial financial impact. Learned advocate Ms.Rathod submits that in view of above, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the petition is required to be allowed.
6. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Naidu appearing for the respondent-corporation, submits that the statement recorded by the Checking Officer of the petitioner dated 18.12.2017 suggesting that after collecting the fare of Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025 undefined Rs.105/- from each passenger, the tickets have not been issued to four passengers and the handwriting notes were made on advance booking tickets. It is submitted by the learned advocate Mr.Naidu that in the said statement, which was recorded on first point of time, no any defence regarding non-functioning of the EBTM machine was taken.
6.1. Learned advocate Mr.Naidu submits that apart from the present default, there are in all 17 defaults recorded in his default card, which was of the similar nature and therefore, considering the overall circumstance, the punishment of stoppage of three increments with future effect was imposed. Learned advocate Mr.Naidu submits that the examination in chief recorded by the Checking Officer, wherein the petitioner has specifically stated that the EBTM machine of the conductor was functioning in a proper manner. Learned advocate Mr.Naidu submits that the false defence was created by contending that machine was not properly working and therefore, ticket could not come out from the machine.
6.2. Learned advocate Mr.Naidu submits that on considering the evidence, learned Tribunal has dismissed the Reference by confirming the punishment imposed in departmental proceedings and therefore, no any interfere is required and the petition is required to be dismissed.
Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025 undefined
7. Having considered the arguments advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties and having considered the evidence adduced before the learned Tribunal, it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner was serving as a conductor and while he was in charge of the Bus Route No.191 on 18.12.2017, the inspecting squad checked the Bus and they had found four passengers traveling without valid tickets. The Checking Squad Officer also noted that the petitioner had made a handwritten note on an advance booking ticket, mentioning ticket No.035524 and recording the collection of Rs.420/- from the passengers. Consequentially, the departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner for misappropriation and pilferage of the revenue of the corporation. The petitioner has contended that the EBTM machine was malfunctioning and preventing the issuance of the tickets and therefore, he collected Rs.420/- by making note on the advanced booking ticket issued to the passengers. However, the fact remains that the present petitioner did not issue valid tickets despite collecting fares from the passengers.
7.1. It is also not in dispute that a mechanical defect in the machine was not reported on the day of the incident. The statement recorded by the reporting officer specifically indicates that EBTM machine was functioning properly, as confirmed by the petitioner. Subsequently, the false defence created regarding non-functioning of the machine though it was not Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1396/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 18/02/2025 undefined reported to the higher authority or though not recorded any defect in the machine of the conductor. Documentary evidence, which was produced by the respondent-corporation establishes that the petitioner had a history of 17 similar defaults. In addition to that, the statements of the passengers, which are recorded also suggest that on collecting the fare no tickets were issued and the endorsements were made on the advanced booking ticket. These statements were recorded in the presence of the petitioner and after considering the evidence in detail, learned Tribunal has concluded that the punishment imposed during the domestic inquiry is just and proper.
7.2. Admittedly, the legality and validity of the inquiry had been challenged by the present petitioner and in that event if the inquiry had been conducted fairly and properly and there was no victimization or mala fide or unfair labour practice alleged against the employer then the learned Tribunal rightly did not interfere with the punishment imposed by the respondent-employer.
8. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioner. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed being devoid of any merit.
(M. K. THAKKER,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Fri Feb 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 24 21:30:40 IST 2025