THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
W.A.No.60 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated
03.10.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.21340 of 2005.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the
respondent/writ petitioner was appointed as a Conductor on
01.11.1987 and he was removed from service on 30.06.1992 alleging cash and ticket irregularities. The respondent/writ petitioner took shelter of the Labour Court and the Labour Court in I.D.No.777 of 1993 on 13.11.1996 allowed the prayer of the respondent/writ petitioner and directed his reinstatement into service with all consequential benefits, however without back wages. He was reinstated in the month of February, 1997. However, he was not granted 12 years stagnation increment and therefore, he submitted a representation to the Corporation. The representation of the respondent/writ petitioner was considered by the Corporation and rejected by order dated 16.11.2001. The respondent/writ petitioner, being aggrieved by the rejection of his representation, came up before this court and the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition directing the present appellant/employer to grant him stagnation increment.
2
The order of removal was challenged by the respondent/writ petitioner and an award was passed by the Labour Court on 13.11.1996. The award is on record and paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of the award read as under:-
8. POINT No.2: As per my finding above as the charge No.2 is not clearly established and the other charges are purely technical the punishment of removal is not proportionate to the misconduct committed by the petitioner.
9. IN THE RESULT the Award is passed (1) setting aside the order of removal passed against the petitioner (2) and directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service with all attendant benefits but without back wages.
10. The Award shall be implemented within 50 days from the date of publication of the Award.
The aforesaid award makes it very clear that a direction was issued to reinstate the respondent/writ petitioner into service with continuity of service along with all benefits, except back wages. The present appellant/employer did not challenge the award passed by the Labour Court at any point of time and therefore, once the respondent/writ petitioner was reinstated into service with all consequential benefits, he is certainly entitled for stagnation allowance which is granted to all other employees after completion of 12 years of service. The learned Single Judge was justified in holding that the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled for grant of 12 years stagnation increment.
This court does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge and the respondent/writ petitioner is certainly entitled for grant of 12 years stagnation increment with all consequential benefits, in 3 the light of the order passed by the Labour Court, by virtue of which he has been granted all consequential benefits.
Resultantly, the writ appeal is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ _______________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 13.12.2021 JSU