THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.917 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated
11.12.2018 passed in W.P.No.16594 of 2002 by the learned
Single Judge.
The facts of the case reveal that the
respondent/employee was serving on the post of Conductor,
who was suffering from Tuberculosis, was unauthorisedly absent for about 196 days for the period with effect from 17.04.1988 to 16.05.1989 and he did submit medical certificates to the employer. However, a charge sheet was issued on 23.05.1989 in respect of the unauthorized absence and an enquiry officer conducted an enquiry. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority has passed an order of removal from service on 23.02.1991. The employee preferred a petition under Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the Labour Court has passed an award on 05.05.2000 and in place of removal, the employee was reinstated into service with continuity of service but without back wages and awarded punishment of stoppage of three increments without cumulative effect. The award of the Labour Court is on record. Paragraphs 10 to 14 of the award passed by the Labour Court are reproduced as under:
2
"10. Heard both sides and perused record.
POINTS 1 & 2
11. In the rejoinder, it is clearly mentioned that the workman having long absented to his duties have submitted combined medical + fitness certificate by a private Doctor. The Rule 20 in APSRTC Regulations reads as follows:-
"Habitual late attendance, irregular attendance, absence without leave and "without reasonable cause" and absent without permission and wasting time or loitering while on duty".
12. In this case, it is the contention of the workman that he was suffering from T.B. + Asthama, so there is a reasonable cause for his absence and submitted medical certificates for his absence, therefore the removal of the workman from service by the respondent is not justified one. thus, these points answered accordingly.
13. In view of my discussion supra, the respondent is directed to reinstate the workman into service with continuity of service but without back wages, while withholding 3 annual increments without cumulative effect.
14. In the result, the I.D. is partly allowed accordingly without costs."
Undisputedly, the employee was suffering from Tuberculosis and Asthama and there was a reasonable cause for his absence. He was admitted to hospital and medical certificates were produced before the employer and therefore, the Labour Court was justified in interfering with the quantum of punishment in exercise of powers conferred under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Single Judge was certainly justified in dismissing the writ petition. This Court also does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. 3 Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ______________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 16.12.2021 ES