THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.457 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated
24.12.2018 passed in W.P.No.14286 of 2005 by the learned Single
Judge.
The facts of the case reveal that the respondent/employee
was appointed as a Conductor on 28.12.1987. On 31.08.2001, a surprise check took place and certain ticket irregularities were noticed. After conducting a departmental enquiry, punishment of removal was inflicted on 06.03.2002. The employee raised an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the Labour Court with an award dated 29.07.2004 has set aside the order of removal directing the appellant/Corporation to reinstate the employee in to service along with 25% back wages. Being aggrieved by the award dated 29.07.2004 passed by the Labour Court, a writ petition was preferred and as the employeer was not able to find out any irregularity or illegality in the award passed by the Labour Court, the writ petition has been dismissed.
This Court has carefully gone through the award passed by the Labour Court. The Labour Court has meticulously analysed the statement of witnesses. The award reveals that one passenger gave a statement that he has given Rs.6/- to the Conductor and the Conductor did not issue any ticket. The employee was found with 2 a torn note and his contention is that because the currency given was in a very bad shape, he requested the passenger to give him another note and while the bus was going, on account of mechanical failure it stopped at a particular place and in those circumstances, the ticket was not issued to the passenger. The Labour Court keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case has moderated the order of removal, directing reinstatement of the employee. Labour Court under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and keeping in view the evidence set aside the punishment and directed reinstatement of the workman along with 25% back wages. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition preferred by the employer. 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.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ______________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 23.11.2021 ES