Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs The Presiding Officer on 24 April, 2025
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
W.A(MD)No.1065 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 24.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA
W.A.(MD)No.1065 of 2020
and
C.M.P(MD)No.5844 of 2020
The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Madurai Division-IV),
Bye Pass Road,
Dindigul.
Now Known as Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Madurai Ltd.,
Bye Pass Road,
Madurai – 625 016. ... Appellant/ 2nd Respondent
Vs.
1.The Presiding Officer
Labour Court,
Trichy. ... 1st Respondent/ 1st Respondent
2.K.Dhanasekara Pandian ... 2nd Respondent / Petitioner
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
W.A(MD)No.1065 of 2020
Prayer: This Writ Appeal is filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to
set aside the order passed in W.P(MD).No.14790 of 2010 dated
04.06.2019 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah
For Respondents : Mr.K.Gokul – for R2
Labour Court – R1
JUDGMENT
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
R.POORNIMA, J.
It is a very pathetic case of a Driver, who had been imposed
capital punishment of dismissal from service for not accounting ticket
worth about Rs.27/-. The learned Single Judge having considered the
facts of the case and the disproportional punishment imposed on the
respondent had allowed his writ petition. But set aside the impugned
order of dismissal with a direction to reinstate him with continuity of
service but without back-wages.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
2. Being aggrieved the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State
Transport Corporation, has preferred the writ appeal stating that the
respondent is a habitual delinquent and he had earlier involved in certain
misconducts and suffered punishment. Citing the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Divisional Controller, KSRTC
(NWKRTC) Vs. A.T.Mane reported in 2005(3) SCC 254 wherein, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that a Bus Conductor who had been
entrusted with the responsibility of protecting the financial interest of the
Corporation if loses confident or faith of the employee termination is
permissible and justifiable.
3. After hearing the learned Standing Counsel for the
appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent and on perusal of
the records, this Court finds that the non-accounting of three numbers
Rs.9/- ticket appears to be due to fatigueness, since on that particular day
the respondent was continuously working for more than 9 hours and the
inspection was conducted in the fag end of the day. Further more. it is
not the case of the Department that he has sold the ticket and
misappropriate the money. The allegation is that he has not made entry
in the trip sheet.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
4. This Court also ascertain from the learned Standing
Counsel appearing for the appellant that for his previous misconduct the
respondent being already been punished and those misconducts were not
similar to what he had now been terminated from service. Therefore, a
person cannot be punished twice for the same misconduct. For non-
accounting of Rs.27/- capital punishment of dismissal of service is highly
disproportionate. Hence, the order of the learned Single Judge has to be
upheld and confirmed.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[G.J., J.] [R.P., J.]
24.04.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
RM
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
To
The Presiding Officer
Labour Court,
Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
and
R.POORNIMA, J.
RM
Judgment made in
24.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/04/2025 05:57:01 pm )
