Delhi Transport Corporation vs Om Prakash
2014 Latest Caselaw 7136 Del

$~9
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
           +     LPA No.806/2014 & CM Nos.21088-21090/2014

                                 Date of Decision: 23rd December, 2014

      DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION           ..... Appellant
                   Through Ms.Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. with
                           Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Adv.

                             versus

      OM PRAKASH                                           ..... Respondent

Through

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL)

1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the

entire record which was before the writ court, has been filed with

the appeal. We have consequently heard learned counsel for the

appellant who has taken us through the relevant record. The

appellant assails the judgment dated 20th August, 2014 passed in

WP (C) No.596/2013 filed by the Delhi Transport Corporation

(hereinafter referred to as `DTC') which has been dismissed. The

learned Single Judge has thereby upheld the order dated 18th

December, 2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court

holding that the disciplinary proceedings conducted by the DTC

against the respondent-workman was vitiated and illegal as well as

the industrial Award dated 27th August, 2012 finding the

termination of the services of the respondent contrary to law and

consequently directing re-instatement of the respondent with 50%

back wages.

2. It is an admitted position that the respondent was working

since 1982 with the DTC as a conductor. With regard to an alleged

incident on 5th June, 1992, a charge-sheet dated 16th June, 1992

was issued to the respondent alleging that while performing duty

on 5th June, 1992 on DTC Bus No.9206 plying on route no.838, the

checking team of the DTC in Uttam Nagar at 10.15 a.m. was

informed by the ticket less passengers that the respondent had

accepted fare of Rs.2/- each from two passengers who had boarded

the bus from Hari Nagar Ghanta Ghar for Uttam Nagar without

issuing tickets to the passengers thereby causing financial loss to

the DTC. The DTC alleged that the respondent had accepted his

fault and surrendered two unpunched tickets of Rs.2/- each to the

checking team. The checking team recorded statement of the

passengers to the above effect.

3. On receipt of a report dated 5th June, 1992 from the ticket

inspectors, the respondent was placed under suspension vide memo

dated 10th June, 1992. After considering the reply by the

respondent, the matter stood referred to the inquiry officer. The

inquiry officer submitted a report to the disciplinary authority

finding the respondent guilty of the misconduct. After service of

the copy of the inquiry report and giving opportunity to file a

defence, by an order dated 10th March, 1995, the disciplinary

authority accepted the recommendations of the inquiry officer and

imposed penalty of removal from service against the respondent.

4. The workman assailed his dismissal and raised an industrial

dispute. An order dated 18th December, 2009 was passed by the

industrial adjudicator holding that the inquiry was vitiated for the

reason that the respondent was not given opportunity to avail the

services of a defence assistant and that the inquiry proceedings

were in violation of the principles of natural justice. It was further

found that the DTC examined only the inquiry officer; disciplinary

authority and one of the ticket inspectors, as witnesses. The

Labour Court had concluded that the disciplinary authority was not

a witness to the case and consequently, so far as the alleged

misconduct was concerned, his evidence was inconsequential.

With regard to the testimony of the ticket inspectors, it was found

that the same was hearsay which could not have been relied upon

by the inquiry officer.

5. It has also been observed that when the cash in hand of the

workman was inspected, the checking officers had found that, if

the allegations were correct, instead of being in excess by Rs.4/-,

the cash with the respondent was actually short by Rs.2.50/-. The

Labour Court has consequently found substance in the contention

of the workman that the passengers had in fact not paid the amount

to the conductor and, to avoid their culpability for travelling

without ticket, had made a false statement when their demeanour

came to light upon checking by the ticket inspectors, had made a

false statement.

Even if the statement by the ticket inspector is taken to be

true, the same is not supported by the factual result of the

inspection of the cash in hand by the inspector.

6. It was pointed out on behalf of the respondent-workman

before the learned Single Judge that bus route no.838 from Jama

Masjid to Uttam Nagar is an extremely busy route and the bus was

over crowded at all points of time. The submission was that the

two passengers took benefit of the same.

7. The findings on fact recorded by the Labour Court as well as

by the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted on any legally

tenable grounds.

For all these reasons, we find no merit in the appeal which is

hereby dismissed.

CM Nos.21090/2014 & 21089/2014

8. Inasmuch as we have heard the appeal on merit and found no

substance in it, no orders are warranted on this application. The

same is disposed of.

CM No.21088/2014

9. In view of the orders passed on the appeal, this application is

rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such.

(GITA MITTAL) JUDGE

(SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL) JUDGE

DECEMBER 23, 2014 aa